Actually, that article is quite inaccurate. I have a child at Darell. It is nothing to do with dropping pupil numbers at the school. The school is currently educating many more children than it has previously done as we were expanded to two form entry some years ago in response to a demand for places in the local area (parents were not particularly in favour but it seems we don't count much in these consultations). Most classes are full or near to full. Some are above capacity. We do suffer from a local perception that we don't do well in results. In fact, Darell's percentages of pupils making expected progress or above in many recent years are better than more popular schools such as Marshgate or Queen's. And the percentage of children getting level 5+ before levels were removed compared extremely well to other local schools (higher than Marshgate, for instance) especially considering that Darell has a much higher proportion of SEN and FSM compared to most of the others. Darell does a great job of tailoring education to the individual needs of the children it is serving.
The problem with the funding is here and is a direct result of the changes to school funding being brought in by the current government (this is going to impact all schools, not just Darell):
www.schoolcuts.org.uk/#/schools?chosenSchool=3182004
If you look at other local schools, they stand to lose a lot less funding than we do per child. This is because there is a clear difference in the demographic at Darell compared to some other local schools. For instance, Darell is likely to lose £456 per pupil compared to, for instance, Marshgate losing £147 per pupil or £143 for Sheen Mount. Children who are already disadvantaged are being shortchanged. This is particularly problematic given that Darell is educating a cohort of children who deserve education as much as any other, but many of whose parents tend not to have the spare cash to give to fundraising efforts. I am quite sure that the funding gap at other schools with more privileged cohorts will have the funding gap filled by parents who are either paying for tutoring or donating directly to the school. £150 a year is less than £3 a week. Easily affordable for children whose parents are well off. Darell's children will need £10 a week from all parents including the large number who are on minimum wage. We all know that the demographic is different at Darell compared to Queen's or Marshgate or Vineyard.
As a consequence of this, the governing body at Darell are running full tilt at academisation in an attempt to have a plan in place before the funding gap hits. I am not sure how this will help. We won't get any more money.
In addition we have been presented with this academy plan as a more or less fait accompli. There are plenty of parents who think this is a terrible idea.
Anyway, the article, while welcome as a way to raise knowledge of what's happening, is really seriously flawed.