Richmond Borough Schools Chat 8

[muminlondon2]

This thread follows on from Richmond Borough Schools Chat 7.

News and opinions on all the changes to schools in Richmond borough.

Hello. I'm new to this board so please feel free to tell me I'm in the wrong place!

My child has just started in reception at Darell Primary School. A few weeks ago we received a letter to say that the governors want to join 'Every Child Every Day' Multi-academy Trust (which currently runs two secondary schools - Greycourt in our borough and Hollyfield in Kingston). There is going to be a consultation with staff and parents/carers but suggestions are that a decision has effectively already been made by the governing body.

Are similar moves afoot in other local primary schools? Does anyone know if any schools are investigating other options... Like remaining in the local authority or joining together to form a federation of schools?

Intaglio if Greycourt are involved its got to be a safe bet surely but then you've got to question anyone's judgement when they come up with such a daft name! Maybe they should have called it the Greycourt Trust instead if they're leading it.

Back on the progress 8 scores the very average Orleans Park one is consistent with what I've heard about it being not what it used to be, kids being a bit bored in some classes, not many after school clubs, and so on. Maybe they'll end up in a MAT before too long too. Maybe with RTS? Or joint the same one as Teddington etc. I heard they lost some teachers to Twickenham Academy this year which is interesting.

Orleans has had the luxury of being right in the middle of expensive owner-occupied very expensive houses with minimal deprivation, EAL, pesky council estates or out of borough kids like those on the edges of the borough and has coasted as it got results that that made it look good because of its middle class families. This is what the progress 8 measure should iron out - ie no longer just the raw number of gcses which they could hoover up without difficulty, but having to ensure that children work to their potential

I would have to disagree with the last comment. There are plenty of children at Orleans from 'non leafy' backgrounds and others with special needs. From what I have seen it seems to do well by all types of children. Far more of a mixed intake than Waldegrave or even Teddington and gets decent results. If it stays like this as the link schools siblings work there way through the school and catchments get ever tighter is another matter, it might be a completely different place in 3/4 years time which is a shame.

MrsSalvo I think your comments are a bit wide of the mark. This is the allocation map for Orleans in 2015, some of those blue dots are in roads which would fall squarely into your definition of a Council estate with high levels of deprivation, and those were initial allocations, we know that the catchment stretched further by September. www.richmond.gov.uk/orleans_park_dist_offers_2015.pdf

I was chatting to a couple of mothers who live in Isleworth /Brentford and have children with statemented special needs, and they told me Orleans Park was the first preference for parents in their position in their area which might help explain why the number of children with statemented special needs at Orleans Park is twice the national average. They have a specialist unit to support pupils with specific learning difficulties.

However, if they are not scoring adequately on progress they they are letting down those children as well as the m ore able - ie coasting to get simply to get the requisite number of gcse passes. They can no longer get away with that. All children deserve to work to their potential.

Intagli0 that's really interesting. Grey Court and its head have an outstanding track record on school improvement, although they have worked very closely with the Achieving for Children as academies. But the big plus for Darell might be if they reinstate priority admissions to Grey Court for Kew and North Sheen pupils. It would ensure stability in providing more secondary choice for Richmond borough/Middlesex side children (beyond a CofE school). Many in that area don't have Waldegrave as an option, and some are even out of initial catchment for RPA. So if that's a possibility it would be interesting, because of all primary schools, Darell probably lost out more than most from the lack of link system.

It appears that primaries becoming part of MATs with secondaries could result in a re-introduction of linked schools by the back door. But not sure that Nelson get priority admissions to Waldegrave or anywhere else in the MAT so perhaps that isn't the intention.

Will there be the equivalent of progress 8 scores for students doing A-levels at all schools/sixth form colleges at some point? (or is there an existing one for current sixth forms). The intake for sixth forms at schools is so different from there intake in year 7 at present that I wouldn't judge a sixth form by the score at GCSE. The average A-level score for each sixth form college locally appears rather dire to me (C+ at Esher, C- at Strodes, D+ at Richmond, E+ at Kingston) but I've no idea what the starting point was!

The Guardian has: What does the dropping of the education bill mean?

Education secretary Justine Greening has announced the scrapping of her predecessor Nicky Morgan’s schools policy. This looks like another example of Theresa May’s government clearing the decks after the Cameron era . .

What other U-turns may be on the way?

The outlook for legislation allowing new grammar schools remains fraught: there appears to be little enthusiasm for it among Conservatives. Even if the SNP stays neutral, any new law could get blocked in the House of Lords.

But one policy that could easily be dropped is forced retakes for pupils who fail to gain at least a C in maths and English GCSEs – another Gove-era legacy that is very unpopular among head teachers.

I don't see that it would be in Nelson's interest to link in terms of priority admissions to Waldegrave, because that just formalises lack of advantage for boys - must be why Waldegrave never had links before. But if TH can be have an admissions point in North Teddington with a school in Whitton, then I suppose Nelson could have that with Teddington in the reverse direction. It makes more sense to get Twickenham Academy to make progress so that Nelson pupils have a good school locally - then a link would be unnecessary because they'd always have distance priority.

I can't see that Fern Hill Primary in Kingston has made a decision on joining a MAT - Janet Hilton has stepped down as chair of governors too. Not that I have any inside knowledge, but now that the Bill has been dropped, primaries would only need to consider this if there is a particular advantage for them, rather than having to jump before they are pushed.

Thanks for your replies Jellytoto, muminlondon2 and LProsser.

Jellytoto, I agree that the name of the trust in question 'Every Child Every Day' is particularly crass!

As to priority admissions to Greycourt, there seems to be no talk of that for Darell pupils. So whilst Greycourt is clearly a successful secondary school, there is no obvious relationship for Darell. Historically, some Darell pupils have gone on to Greycourt but with shrinking distance criteria, fewer and fewer. And no-one at Darell had even heard of Hollyfield, the other secondary school in the trust that is in Surbiton!

Particularly with the education bill now having being dropped, I can't see the advantage of joining a multi-academy trust.

(And politically, it seems clear to me that MATs are privatisation in disguise, however benign some trusts appear to be. I think that this sort of power without proper accountability inevitably corrupts.)

I think with the Richmond West MAT (Waldegrave, Teddington, Twickenham and Hampton Academies) it was a case of necessity as Twick and Hamp needed some support when the Learning Schools Trust bailed out but I can't see any need for primaries to join a trust unless the LB Richmond forces them to become academies which I know is what it wants to do. Better to be in a local trust than hoovered up by a national chain and have your funds appropriated to support other schools in areas with not enough children to make them viable which was what happened to RPA. Link with Grey Court doesn't seem to make sense but I suppose there is no alternative secondary school that is any nearer.

Are the Education Bill proposals about allowing 100% faith based admissions for religious schools and allowing new grammar schools being dropped?

No u-turn on the admissions or grammar school plan yet LProsser but it's only a green paper and there is an open consultation that closes on Dec 12th. Nick Gibb has been summoned to grammar schools ‘evidence check’ hearing next Tues, so it'll be interesting to hear what comes out of that!

I wonder if the drive to join a MAT comes from the seemingly impossible task of balancing the books.

I don't see why it would be harder for one maintained primary out of over 30 in the borough to balance its books than it would be as the only primary in MAT with two secondaries. Where's the economy of scale for the primary school, unless it is a direct feeder? The main advantages would be sharing of expertise and resources for a smooth Y6/Y7 transition (e.g. agreeing on a FL strategy or innovative Maths catch-up scheme).

Where I have seen it working well is in all through schools where primary PE and languages, and extension work for gifted and talented are taught by subject specialists form the senior school.

There have always been opportunities for schools to work together to smooth the transition between primary school and year 7 though... And as I've said, there is no priority admissions link between Darell and Greycourt (or the other secondary school miles away in Surbiton!). I am sceptical about whether specialist teaching or sports facilities will be made available in our primary school.

What I am interested to know is which other primary schools are considering joining a MAT and whether 'Achieving for Children' are encouraging this move to academise. Is the Local Authority already unviable?

There was a link till 2013. To establish a new one they'd have to consult on admissions. But it would be useful for Darell pupils to have it.

There's a story in today's BBC news about school funding and how small schools are struggling financially so that's the stick. There needs to be some carrots though. Like someone else said for primaries it's probably access to specialist teachers and facilities. I guess they could maybe join up with other primaries for that but maybe that would be the blind leading the blind. At least by joining forces with Grey Court they have an experienced local partner.
The Darrell Governors should be making the positives clear to parents if they're sure its the right move.
I think the LA want all the schools to be academies so they're not going to oppose it. They're probably brokering it.

Why does Achieving for Children want all the schools to become academies? I think you're right from reading various schools' governing body minutes that you are right that they are trying to broker deals but I just don't understand why. It seems so counter-intuitive.

Maybe I'm on the wrong track here but after Grey Court started improving, the fact that Kingston primaries (Fern Hill, Latchmere) won feeder links really disrupted secondary provision on the Surrey side, and was a disadvantage for Darell because its pupils would always lose out when distance got applied to feeders. Now they have Kingston Academy, North Kingston is well served, but North Sheen only has Christ's. Both Vineyard and Marshgate have a lot of girls going to Waldegrave, and otherwise going private (if not trying for Tiffin). And still have a better chance on distance to Grey Court. So there is less benefit for them to get a new link. If I'm wrong and priority admissions was never was a motivation for Darell joining the MAT, then perhaps parents should be pressing for it anyway.

Intaglio, I expect it's just that we have a Conservative council which agrees with the Conservative government that all schools should be academies.

Given that the local population voted for a conservative council and a conservative MP then is in tune with local wishes. Those who voted against may protest, but not reasonable to expect otherwise. If you don't like the policy, canvass for a party that has an alternative view.

Hallo, yes Richmond Council has been trying to persuade the primaries to become academies for years as part of its desire to be a commissioning only Council. I can't really see how secondary school teachers round here will find the time to travel to primaries that are some distance away to deliver PE and language lessons, although it's a possibility in theory. Have been to several school 6th form open evenings lately and there are very few doing language A-levels, but there is a heavy teaching load in Key Stage 3. The PE teachers are always busy.

Incidentally continue to be quite impressed by the school 6th forms - they all have nice new buildings and small class sizes and seem to be getting quite good results. I asked a while back if anyone understood what the A-level equivalent of Progress 8 was. There seems to be a thermometer with 9 levels on it and all the local schools are in the top bit which they feel is very good but I don't really understand what's being measured!

Have now been to four school Sixth Forms and a clearer picture is emerging in my mind of what's going on. Grey Court seems to be doing well and retaining a high % of its own students post GCSE. It's not yet full but has 100 in current Yr 12 I think. It seems to be offering a slightly broader range of courses than the other schools including BTECs.

Orleans Park is also doing fairly well at retaining its own students.

Teddington has fewer students than the others and I know it is suffering from the long tradition of everyone going to Esher. It has the smallest building of the four so possibly couldn't take as many students anyway. I noticed that there were quite a few Hampton High students at the open evening.

All three of these schools are saying that most students will from 2017 be taking 3 A-levels and not doing AS.

Waldegrave was full last year, turned 24 people away, and is capping its intake at 140 in 2017. After Waldegrave girls, of whom apparently about 80 stayed on last year, there are 40 reserved places for boys and remaining 20 or so places on distance. All the boys I spoke to had come there from private schools, although I'm sure some of the boys there are from state schools. The head boy (from a private school) gave a speech about how nice it was to be in a place where he was not just a grades statistic and he felt people cared about him which my daughter found quite amusing as her initial impression of Waldegrave was that it was obsessed with results! I feel that it is covertly selecting because, unlike the other three, everyone has to do 4 subjects in Yr 12, take 4 ASs and then drop one subject and do 3 A-levels. This is off-putting for the slightly less academic students (and for lazy ones!). We were also told that "anyone who wants to do BTECs should go to the Hampton High table" (Waldegrave, Hampton High and Teddington were all represented at one another's open evenings)!

So, although the entry criteria for all four schools are the same ie. you generally need a B for you chosen subjects and 5 A*-Cs, something a bit different is happening to the intake in practice! When you see next few year's results do bear this in mind!