Richmond Borough Schools Chat 7

[muminlondon2]

Lots and lots of discussions on local schools and education issues preceded this thread, including Richmond Borough Schools Chat 6.

Anyone who wants to carry on that discussion, and offer information and opinions (without being moderated by any particular individual or interest group, bearing in mind all the usual mumsnet guidelines about respect and not getting personal, etc.) - feel free.

So the proposed Turing House 2017 policy makes no concessions on the admissions point, no change to the 20/80 split in favour of Teddington residents, but does increase the PAN to 200 from 2018, despite there being 150 extra in the previous year at Richmond Upon Thames School and places available at Hampton Academy and Twickenham Academy.

That looks like a very agressive position to take against Hampton/Twickenham. No more Mrs Nice BayJay.

More on this consultation and the 'slight mess-up' of how it has been launched is in a story on what I assume was is the online site for the Hounslow Chronicle.

The expanded intake would mean up to 40 extra places for pupils from North Teddington (up to 160 places after siblings), with 10 more places from its site at Hospital Bridge Road - if indeed that site and a brand new build is what they actually have in mind.

When i looked at the photos of the new TH building I assumed the whole post was intended to be ironic -all those exclamation marks!!!! It looks very bog standard to me. I assume that the same free school trust wants to use the building for a primary school next as Richmond Council has said thats its preferred option for Teddington. It is another pollution blackspot on a very busy road. They have chosen to put the childrens play area at the front by the road and leave the car park at the back which doesn't seem the best arrangement for the young THs. But i dont think much of the £1.5m went on the outside areas!

There are lots of comments about the TH consultation and the site on the Whitton Village FB page today including all the old familiar arguments.

I don't get how you can permission already to expand a school when you have only just been open for one term, the Ofsted inspection is three years away and there's no planning permission for the site yet.

A comment on the Whitton Against Turing House FB page estimates the number of extra buses for a school that size on Hospital Bridge Road - 13 or 14 extra 481 buses within minutes of each another, plus all the extra cars and vans for staff and services. If not buses, they'd be a much bigger number of cars.

That wouldn't just affect Whitton - it would have an impact on air quality levels all the way from Kingston, or wherever the starting point was. Look at the air quality map mentioned in the RTT last week and you can see Stanley Road and Teddington High Street are already above safe levels.

Russell Education Trust is using the same 'the council has asked us to do it' line in Bristol, where it is also proposing to up the number of places by 33% to 200. This is the trust's only other non-religious school.

Meanwhile the 2015 census shows that nearby Henbury and Orchard schools (rated 'Good', like BFS, but with a third of the school eligible for FSM compared to 13.5%) have suffered in terms of pupil numbers. Each has about 20 fewer pupils in Y7 compared to Y11, with less than 240 pupils between them. Like Hampton Academy and Twickenham Academies, they take their pupils from local catchments areas. BFS, like Turing House, decided its admission point first, found a building between the two above mentioned schools in a less middle class area, and and has a 20/80 split.

Mum - I'm sure RET would jump at the chance of a building in the area of need, whether that be in Bristol or Fulwell. And they are certainly not the only trust using admission points: Ealing Fields High School; University of Birmingham School; Harris Invictus Academy Croydon, to name but a few.

It's a pragmatic strategy to the problem of sites/buildings not being available where the school is most needed. Anyway, I don't want to rehash it all, just want to point out that this is not specific to RET.

And we know for a fact that the council has asked schools to increase PAN hence the Orleans, Waldegrave and RPA expansions, so I don't see it as a "line" being used by RET, they're just doing what's been asked of them.

There are differences between those policies:

1. The University of Birmingham School's admission policy is for four nodal points, but the largest intake is from the area around the school.
2. Harris Invicta also has four nodal points, with 25% from each.

This is very different from the crude 20/80 arrangement from an admissions point that has, as you know, already moved up the road by 1km.

1. Ealing Fields High School has one nodal point. This was like Turing House when it took 100% of its admissions from the road next to Waldegrave. It doesn't appear to have a site, or even an address yet. Perhaps this admission point will stay in one place, rather than moving 1 km up the road after the likely site location was made known to RET but not to anyone else.

Turing House's Essex sister school, Becket Keys, isn't increasing its intake, but is set to become even more religiously discriminating. They are consulting on a new admissions policy for 2017.

After looked after, SEN, founders' children and siblings, 50% of the places will go to those who can prove fortnightly attendance at church. The rest used to be allocated on distance, but they want to introduce a new criterion for two CofE feeder schools (taking 115 pupils) which have 100% religious admissions (including a Oratory-like priority 'on the depth of the parents’ involvement in the work and worship of the church'). And then there's 'any other applicant'.

If the school is going to expand it makes sense to agree that before they build it rather than afterwards and for it to be known before the planning application goes in not after. If it's a big enough site and the council needs places then it's the responsible thing to consider but I hope it doesn't happen. As a parent I want it to stay small. My neighbours who want a place in 3 years time will disagree though and with all the pressure on school finances its going to be difficult for schools not to "go large" if they have room.
There's no point making a fuss about buses, congestion and the like if there's no alternative site. Even if they stuck a couple of extra stories on an improved Twickenham Academy the kids would be making the same journey and Hampton Academy is also in a road with 3 other schools. But maybe you think we'll all just home educate if TH isn't built muminlondon?

You should respond to the consultation if you want the school to remain small. I did wonder how expansion would go down with parents who would otherwise have chosen Turing House over Teddington for its size. I get the feeling you are indeed a parent with no prior knowledge of this jellytoto, whereas bluestars seems informed enough about comparative admissions policies to make me think she has an interest in the school as a governor. Is that possible?

Nope Mum - but my DC does go to TH so I have a vested interest and do find myself being drawn into defending it. Must learn to stop and let these discussion fizzle out!

(I know the policies are different for the other schools I just didn't want to spend all afternoon on Google to make a general point about how admission policies are having to adapt in a very difficult and changing educational and planning landscape).

Recent story about a school in Osterley getting planning permission to build on MOL here. Similar situation to TH in Whitton?

Mum - didn't mean to imply that investigating the other school policies was OTT just that I wasn't using the examples as detailed comparisons. Always interesting to see what others are doing, I'm turning into such a schools nerd :)

The design of the new classrooms is so modern and looks fabulous!!

To be honest, the classroom design looks near-identical to that of any other school classroom. I'm much more interested in the quality of teaching, particularly the fact that the published staff list still doesn't show anyone who claims to have the statutory Senco qualification.

bluestars a fellow school nerd here. The new school market culture is getting closer to home now in how it might (adversely) affect my DC's school and/or funding , so that's my personal interest too - the new Ted/Twick MAT idea would otherwise be a community-minded and collaborative approach. Your examples are interesting as a way of spreading distribution of school places further afield without academic or social selection. The 'nodes' for some of them are stations - more logical maybe than a postcode or obscure point/line on a map, and still possible to ensure a time limit on school journeys too. However, like Waldegrave's old quadrant system they may end up being too complicated for parents. Two MPs and the council have criticised TH's admissions policy as it stands - expansion doesn't change that. There could be a fairer policy in Google land and it's certainly up to the school to propose. But in a market culture they will just defend their interests. Happy to end that conversation though.

I haven't seen any convincing arguments against the 80:20 policy from any politicians, just vote winning "it's not fair on Whitton" rhetoric during the election. I haven't heard any opinions from Hampton, Fulwell, N Tedd councillors at all but maybe they're just clueless or too weak to speak up. There is a vocal Whitton Tory councillor but he was vocal in support of St Richard Reynolds too so he seems to just want to feather his own nest and sod the rest of us. In the meantime its absolutely bleeding obvious that there's a big hole in the middle of the schools map and lots of extra kids set to burst out of primaries in the 80% area.

I agree Jelly that politicians are commenting for their own reasons, I am very sceptical about their motives. The blatant lack of support for TA is surprising now that the local MAT plan may turn it around. Why would they want to undermine that by increasing TH's proportion from the school gates? I wonder if what they say in private is any different to their public statements.

Mum - I've been wondering how the Teddigton and Waldegrave parents are viewing the local MAT plan. Obviously it's a good thing to share best practice but at what expense? Waldegrave looks to be in a stronger position that Teddington to do this but they are also involved in RUTS - spreading themselves too thin?

It seems to me that the proposed 80:20 policy is self-evidently absurd. It will cause all sorts of resentment if people who live very near the new site don't get a place whilst others who live further away do. Waldegrave's similar system causes a lot of grief, but at least the area further away from the school has the smaller proportion, and there is a logical reason for it. There is no logic behind the Turing proposal beyond what sounds suspiciously like a wish to favour the children of aspiring Teddington families rather than those nasty Hounslow, Whitton and Hampton types.

The blatant lack of support for TA is surprising now that the local MAT plan may turn it around.

Now that really is misleading. The local MAT plan came from from the LA in the first place. I know for a fact that Tania Mathias was aware of this and supported improvement at those schools. The RPA MAT idea surfaced months ago and it is probably that TA/HA was part of their rethinking too. Judging from the veiled criticism of Kunskappsskolan as the LibDems' choice of sponsor in council debates, such an action plan was being discussed behind the scenes but needed further development before it could be announced formally. ,

What they may not have known was that TH was going to increase its PAN, for which it can consult but does not need any permission or some stated request from the LA. Agree with icimoi that taking such a large cohort from one spot past two existing undersubscribed schools is illogical in terms of planning, from the point of view of the council, since that spot has also moved. The defence that those schools offered lack of choice and a niche untested methodology, that justifies bussing pupils past them to a newly built one, will no longer apply if the MAT idea is successful.

And from a completely tiny unscientific sample group of acquaintances, while Waldegrave and Teddington parents may worry about those schools being overstretched, they do not look favourably on the motives of TH management either.

I disagree there's no logic for it because the consultation makes the case quite clearly, and I haven't seen any logic on the others side at all, just emotion and class warfare.

The Catholic school debate was about fair admissions on the grounds of social selection. There were endless stats and maps showing relative rates of FSM. We were told RISC wasn't anti-faith schools, since its campaign was promoted by parents of children in CofE primaries. it was also about fairness, or 'class warfare' as you put it - or I thought.

I clearly haven't been following this as long as you muminlondon but one of my NCT friends is a St Edmunds mum and she says there's been a big shift there with boys in particular all now going to St Richard Reynolds rather than St Marks in Hounslow because the journey is "less dodgy" so Whitton has its fair share of snobbery and in any case I don't think Whitton is any less posh than Hampton North which will miss out big time if the percentage at the admissions point reduces.

Would it be OK if a Whitton mum joins the discussion?

Most Whitton and Heathfield parents I know agree with Fulwell and Teddington residents in that they would like:

-a co-educational school
-a high quality community school
-a non-denomatorial secondary school which welcomes students of all faiths
-a school that is smaller than others in the borough
-a secondary school that is open to all local children
-a school that is at the heart of the community
-choice of an alternative to the Kunsskappskolan model schools
-a place at our first choice of secondary school
-a place at a borough school that is not underperforming
-a community school serving Twickenham, Richmond and surrounding areas

We appreciate that a lot of hard work and effort is involved in applying for a free school and gaining the government funding and that those efforts were not made by Whitton & Heathfield parents.

We share the disappointment of not being able to find a suitable location for the school close to the area where there was the highest concentration of expressions of interest. Nobody would like their child to have to commute daily to school if a suitable alternative were within walking distance.

However, if there were to be survey of expression of interest carried out again now that the permanent site has been confirmed then I´m sure there would be a lot more interest from Whitton/Heathfield residents. Especially now that they know that the school will likely be based near to their homes.

I get that whittonmum but Heathlands ticks a lot of those boxes and so will the new school at the Richmond College site from 2017 so Whitton is better off than Fulwell and Hampton Hill where I am.

Heathlands is an outstanding school and we´re lucky to have it so close by but Hounslow borough has an acute school place shortage, and the catchment areas for those schools are shrinking rapidly. The situation in Hounslow is much worse than Richmond so we can´t expect Richmond borough (Whitton/Heathfield) residents to go out-of-borough for school places.

www.getwestlondon.co.uk/news/west-london-news/extra-34-000-school-places-10524661

What about the Richmond college school whittonmum? Its going to be very accessible to Whitton.