Richmond Borough Schools Chat 9

[ChrisSquire2]

This thread follows on from Richmond Borough Schools Chat 8 starting February 2016.
News and opinions on all the changes to schools in Richmond borough.

See also:

Richmond Borough Schools Chat 7 starting May 2015

Links to earlier threads (1-6), starting in February 2011

How have local school secondary students performed in GCSEs under the new grading system? How do schools across the Borough compare?

It’s so different and they don’t give figures for ‘percentage students gaining at least 5 grade 4s’, etc. Also, when I started looking at private schools they throw in the old ‘IGCSEs are harder!!’ line for selected subjects, though they are still graded A*-C’, so am not even bothering to compare with them. But to make a start:

National average: 66.9% entries at 4-9, 50.3% at 5-9 (new definition of ‘good pass’.

The only consistent figure for comparison (which is still down to prior intake):

Waldegrave 44% - 7-9
Orleans Park 40% - 7-9
Grey Court 40% - 7-9
Christ’s 31% - 7-9
Teddington 28% - 7-9
(National average 20.3% - 7-9)

So above average then. You could also dig out numbers who passed English and/or Maths.

St RR were due their first results weren't they? Anyone know how they did?

According to the RTT 1 in 4 St RR pupils got grades 7-9, so around 25% presumably. 75% got good passes in 5 or more GCSEs.

@molington are you saying Mr Wilkinson is being paid until end of this August and is then no longer head?

I have heard that too via the rumour mill. Allegedly, a pay off and fresh start for the school from September. The school will quickly bounce back I am sure.

Has anyone heard that the EFSA has refused to sign the lease on Turing House's temporary site?

This was posted on the Whitton village facebook site yesterday m.facebook.com/WhittonVillage/?tsid=0.36192236509043063&source=result#!/story.php?story_fbid=2081051968592651&id=366024270095438&ft=top_level_post_id.2081054398592408%3Atl_objid.2081054398592408%3Aoriginal_content_id.2081051968592651%3Athrowback_story_fbid.2081054398592408%3Apage_id.366024270095438%3Apage_insights.%7B%22366024270095438%22%3A%7B%22role%22%3A1%2C%22page_id%22%3A366024270095438%2C%22post_context%22%3A%7B%22story_fbid%22%3A2081054398592408%2C%22publish_time%22%3A1535836026%2C%22story_name%22%3A%22EntStatusCreationStory%22%2C%22object_fbtype%22%3A266%7D%2C%22actor_id%22%3A366024270095438%2C%22psn%22%3A%22EntStatusCreationStory%22%2C%22sl%22%3A4%2C%22dm%22%3A%7B%22isShare%22%3A1%2C%22originalPostOwnerID%22%3A2081051968592651%7D%2C%22targets%22%3A%5B%7B%22page_id%22%3A366024270095438%2C%22actor_id%22%3A366024270095438%2C%22role%22%3A1%2C%22post_id%22%3A2081054398592408%2C%22share_id%22%3A0%7D%5D%7D%7D&tn=%2As%2AsH-R

Huge link Lala!

This one goes direct to the cabinet paper: cabnet.richmond.gov.uk/documents/s75102/Leases%20of%20Former%20Clarendon%20School.pdf

Looks like a storm in a teacup to me - a bit of brinkmanship on behalf of the ESFA for the benefit of a new special needs school which needs a site as much as any other school. There's already an agreed solution and it just needs to be signed off at the cabinet meeting. No doubt the Whitton Village facebook page will make as much hay as they can with it in the meantime though.

Can't understand why the Risk Considerations don't include the risk that the primary phase of the Capella Free School won't get a site and won't be able to open.

Thank you for the shorter link! Yes hopefully just a formality.

I've been thinking about it some more, and wondering about the connection between the sites. I expect the ESFA wanted to put Capella free school onto the Clarendon site (as well as it being temporary home for Turing). Perhaps the Council steered them towards Amyand House instead, despite the planning risks. The Council do need to sell Clarendon in two years time because the money to be raised from the sale is already committed to fund the redevelopment of Richmond College. The document says the terms of the Clarendon lease were agreed in October 2017, when the Conservatives were in charge, so the ESFA are bound to be a bit nervous now and wanting to draw a line in the sand.

All speculation of course, but it fits.

Or put Capella in the Teddington Turing House site as that's already been fitted out as a school to a high standard. One of the reasons Clarendon needed to move was the state of the buildings (Turing is using temp accommodation on the site). I thought the Teddington site was earmarked for a primary school after Turing left but as Richmond is not a priority area I can't see a new primary school being approved anytime soon.

It was never clear to me whether the council wanted the extra primary in addition to an extra form of entry at Collis, or instead of it (so they didn't have to pay for the expansion).

Regarding Mr Wilkinson - he has definitely left Teddington School. Good timing for Yr 6 children and parents still unsure whether to prioritize the school on the application.

www.teddingtonschool.org/Mr-Wilkinson---Message-to-Parents?returnUrl=/Latest-News

Does anyone know if Kathy Pacey will stay as full headteacher or perhaps Tedd School is hiring someone new?

I would expect she will be permanently appointed as she seems excellent. My child just started at the school and Ms Pacey seems to be everywhere - very visible and present - and very hands on with settling everyone back in to school. As does the Head of Year 7, Ms Thornley, who greets the Year 7s every morning as they arrive and seems genuinely invested in them all. They both seem very ‘on it’ so it feels like the school is on the up and my child is, so far, extremely happy.

It looks like Teddington School has another hurdle to overcome.

schoolsweek.co.uk/london-secondary-school-hit-with-financial-notice-to-improve-over-failure-to-balance-budget/

So why did the governors allow things to get this bad? They agreed to massive pay increases for JW, and senior admin staff whilst teachers salaries were ignored. The school has been run so badly and I am surprised no one is being held accountable. Teachers concerns were ignored and those teachers who tried tackle the governing body were 'encouraged' to leave. The recent Ofsted report raised as a concern the fact that teachers were not allowed to fill in the Ofsted questionnaires. The governing body needs to be held accountable and the Bursar, awarded a fat salary increase under JW, needs to justify her lack of control over the financial management of the school.

You can hold the governors to account if you like, but they're unpaid volunteers, and if they walk away I don't suppose anyone will be up for stepping into their shoes.

Perhaps hold the government to account instead, for underfunding schools and encouraging senior leaders to spread themselves too thinly.

In any case, if JW's salary is now off the books, they may be looking a bit brighter.

I think encouraging senior leaders to spread themselves too thinly is certainly not the case at Teddington School. One of the areas that this financial scrutiny is going to look at is Executive pay (Senior Leaders)

Teddington also has to show it can set in-year balanced budgets from 2018-19 onwards, provide evidence that it is using “school resource management tools to improve its financial position, and make sure executive pay follows “a robust evidence-based process and are reflective of the individual’s role and responsibilities”.

JW was allegedly very good at over paying himself and his executives whilst ignoring the pay and conditions of ordinary teachers. I think you are right that it will financially aid the school by no longer having to fund the salary of the most expensive Headteacher in the history of the school.

I thought the role of governers was to hold the school leadership to account? They must have approved JW's payrises and those to his senior non-teaching team. Also the governors did appoint JW, and, according to the Ofsted report, consistently failed to challenge the SMT sufficiently. I know many parents did appeal for support to the governers prior to the Ofsted report and were ignored/dismissed. It seems the issues at Teddington cannot all be laid at the feet of government cuts (appalling though they are) - especially given so many other schools in the borough and close by are getting 'Outstanding' or 'Good' Ofsted ratings, all facing the same financial challenges and often with more challenging intakes and less attractive/new buildings. I believe there are many new governors in place now and that they are doing a great job, but obviously they can only work with the situation they have inherited.

user yes, that is the role of governors. However, not all governors up to the job because they are unpaid volunteers fuelled by goodwill. That didn't matter so much in the past when schools were run (for better or worse) by local councils, but now that most secondaries are academies they live or die by the quality of their governance. The central government are reliant on a massive volunteer workforce for running it's schools in a difficult financial climate.

Some of the more experienced local school governors we're poached/seconded to set up Richmond West Schools Trust, which Teddington was meant to be part of. Now that it isn't going to join that trust, some of those arrangements may need to be reversed.

Presumably JW's "massive" pay rise was related to him stepping up to be head of RWST, rather than just Teddington 'outstanding' head. That's what I meant about him being spread too thinly - he had work to do at Teddington and shouldn't have been flattered into thinking he could also turn around two other schools at the same time.