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

Thanks! @rainbow55

The other point is that Teddington’s sixth form did get rated ‘good’. Establishing that must have taken up a lot of time and energy, as have supporting neighbouring schools (yes, at a time of cuts, and ever changing criteria for Ofsted and exams ). Don’t want to underestimate your concerns but sounds like Teddington can get over this setback. I hope the head gets better soon.

It is fairly obvious, from local noticeboards, that some Teddington parents are looking for tutors in subjects that are either tricky for their child, for whatever reason, or because the child wants to get a good enough grade to be able to take A level in that subject, or both.
I don't know that many OP parents, nor GC, but I know lots of Tedd & Wald parents & many of the former have tutoring going in a couple of subjects.
Maybe that's just because we are those parents though (referred to by PP)

It’s true that you don’t get to know as many parents at the new secondary school but I don’t really see this. Some schools do provide extra support - Waldegrave has ‘stuck club’ for Maths and Grey Court has Maths surgeries.

Hi, I'm probably in danger of sounding like a worn record by now but my dd was in last year's Year 11 at Teddington so I will just make a few points most of which I've made before at some point. 1. It was a bright year according to their SATS results in Year 6 so harder for school to show a lot of progress. My dd is bad at exams so probably dragged down the progress scores but she still got As and Bs for all subjects - just not 10 A so hardly a disaster. No coercion to take EBACC range of subjects so shouldn't read anything into that statistic. 2. I don't know of many people at all in that year who had a lot of tutoring - just the odd person in subjects that they were weak in. 3. Some of my dd's teachers weren't brilliant but most of the ones that she thought weren't so good left or were managed out at the end of last year. 4. There are lots of rumours going round about what happened during the OFSTED inspection and about the inspector's prior relationship with Mr Wilkinson that make me doubt whether it was a very fair inspection but I don't want to repeat them. 5. I have been saying on here for years that Teddington had to take on too much at once with becoming an academy, losing its head to ill health (Mr Weeks), appointing a new head, GCSE changes, opening a 6th form and then having to deploy its senior staff to sort out Hampton and Twickenham Academies. This is not just me - it's what a lot of Teddington parents have been saying for the last few years. I hope that now all these things have happened the school will have the space to sort itself out without any more pressures. 6. I hope the acting head is up to the job of sorting things out - I still believe the funding problems and general teacher shortages will be problem but I agree with MuminL* that this is not a school going down the plughole and it can be sorted out. I don't think there is a massive amount that is terribly wrong. 7. I'm sure Turing House is great but it must be a lot easier to run a school with less than half the number of children in less than half the number of years. 8. I am confused about Mr Wilkinson who I believe is now head of the MAT that consists of Hampton and Twickenham which Waldegrave and Teddington were due to join. I don't think he was that popular with staff at Teddington so probably best he doesn't come back as head.

Being a headteacher is a bloody stressful job at the best of times. I'm not surprised so many end up on long term sick leave with stress-related illnesses after a career-blighting Ofsted inspection. The idea that all you need to do is kick out the old head, re-advertise the role and you'll have a field of Mrs Baileys to take your pick from is just naive - they're few and far between, and every time a Head is publicly shamed and given the social media slagging treatment it probably puts another hundred off taking their career in that direction. Hats off to those that do take it on, but it's not for the faint hearted.

Agree with @lottieprosser and also with @graciousgoodness. Being a head is hard. I’ve also heard the rumours that this inspection was coloured by a personal vendetta. I don’t think we’ve heard the last about this Ofsted inspection. It seems disgraceful on many levels. Headteachers who have seen the GCSE data and who have experience working at schools across the spectrum from Outstanding to Special Measures
are astonished this school could have got an RI outcome.

As a local parent and ex-school leader (didn’t work in Richmond but a resident). It is pleasing to read the balanced debate in this chat.

With parents like you, all local schools will thrive. If we back our local schools, support our teachers and school leaders all schools will be great schools.

It is unfortunate that the HT at Ted Sch is on sick leave. If he read this blog, he’d probably come back as he’d see that there is a lot of support locally for him. Of course, he was not well-liked by all but he was not doing the job on his own. The GB have a lot to answer for and the school’s reviewer/support, whoever they are (London Borough of Richmond)? They should have seen this coming. Ofsted do not make-up judgements and it is just ridiculous to suggest they do. Should we assume then, that OP and GC’s judgements are wrong? Of course not.

I can remember a time not so long ago when Maggie Bailey was not particularly rated in the borough. However, she has proved herself and GC is a great school.

I have a child at Nelson and I am not happy about how the whole thing went down with Waldegrave... who simply walked away, and in tact. The head at Nelson was good but her position became untenable. Just sad.

Bottom line, Teddington, in my opinion, just was not good enough. But the great news is they will surely get better with the swell of support around this school.

The chair of governors has already stepped down but I feel sorry for them. Ofsted are rightly focussing harder on quality of governance these days but governors are unpaid volunteers and schools already struggle to recruit them. It'll be even harder to recruit them in future. As Justtw2 says, maybe the Ofsted report should name and shame the school improvement advisor as well as the Head and the CoG - they're usually well paid.

Sorry to be ignorant but what is GB? I do believe Ofsted do make things up. Especially if there is something personal going on. I know for a fact they have published inaccuracies, or if one is to look more kindly on them, presented a version of the truth that ‘a reasonable man/woman’ would not recognise as truth, in reports.

Nb as far as I understand it from a friend who has children at Teddington, and from chat on here, Mr Wilkinson chose not to steer children’s GCSE choices to suit the new way of assessing progress scores, and that affected these scores. It could be argued that Teddington School has paid the price for that. But it could also be argued that he is to be commended for standing against forever moving goalposts in our education system.

I think GB means Governing Body rainbow55 Someone I knew on Teddington governing body was asked to move to Twickenham Academy a couple of years ago as they didn't have enough governors. The Teddington website has an update from governors dated 9th March which is talking about untangling the various secondments Teddington has made to the other schools so maybe it will be getting at least its previous deputy head back from Hampton if not Mr Wilkinson who was seconded to the MAT fluencycontent2-schoolwebsite.netdna-ssl.com/FileCluster/Teddington/MainFolder/MAT---Teddington--RWST-Update-09-03-18.pdf

@justtw2 I am not saying you are necessarily wrong, but I am curious as to why your opinion is that Teddington School ‘just was not good enough’, given their excellent data for actual GCSEs attained. I don’t understand why you think Ofsted don’t get things wrong. Many big organisations, far more reputable than them, do. I am intrigued by this Ofsted inspection report - a friend who has children there brought it to my attention and it clearly does not add up.

For what it's worth I have been communicating with councillors at LBRUT about the decision making behind the MAT and the pressure that was put on Teddington. Also the make up of the RWT which comprises the ex head of Governors from Teddington and Mr Wilkinson. This is not about a witch hunt going after the school at all but rather the lack of support around the school which may well have led to undue pressure. As an academy, Teddington is no longer under the LA but is directly linked with the DfE. The relevant Regional Commissioner for Schools for our area is [email protected]. I'm going to write to him to suggest a review is undertaken around the decision making behind the aborted MAT arrangements. If I hear anything back I'll post here. It could be useful for others to write if this issue concerns them. The more the 'merrier' for the DfE I suspect.

The Richmond West Schools Trust website doesn't mention the ex Chair of Teddington governors or who the current Chair of the trustees of RWST is so presumably she has resigned. It does have quite a lot of other trustees though: www.rwst.co.uk/

Richmond Council insisted that all its secondaries had to become academies back in 2012 because it wanted to stop running as many services as possible so it ought to take some responsibility. Presumably a regional commissioner can't offer as much support. Three years ago when the MAT was set up parents were told that it was the only way of plugging a financial black hole that was looming because the first 3 years of special bribes for becoming an academy were running out. I don't disagree with the idea of a local MAT (given that the whole academies programme is misguided in my view) as it should be more democratic than being taken over by a national chain but it has to be properly staffed and financed.

It does say who the chair is if you read down. It's someone who was poached from Stanley, which also got RI recently (another devastating blow resulting in sick leave for a very popular and committed Head). It just goes to show that no matter how good the governance and leadership you can't just spread it more thinly whilst starving it of cash and expect everything to be fine. What a mess!

The Council have just released a press article re the permanent site for TH. (Hoping this works as a link!) www.richmond.gov.uk/council/news/press_office/older_news/march_2018/turing_house_site_milestone
It's interesting as makes a very clear statement that TH has a firm commitment to looking at admissions points once it is built there. If of course it is built there, as there is still planning and a local election to go. I worry that if they do go to Whitton, and then increase the % of children from Whitton, which seems entirely fair, then it will not be good news for Twickenham Academy. The current catchment point which is equi-distant from the 4 co-ed existing schools seemed a good idea, but of course seems less of a good idea if you are a parent in Whitton who wants access to the school. I can't see easily how this will be resolved to satisfy conflicting pressures.

An update on permanent site for Turing House has just been announced
www.richmond.gov.uk/council/news/press_office/older_news/march_2018/turing_house_site_milestone

If the DfE has a few million to spare, really wish it would spend it on teachers, school improvement and LA capacity building rather than new buildings.

And I do think the academies programme has destabilised local authorities, hollowing them out, and spread expertise thinly among existing schools (whether academies or not). Always been concerned about this, now very angry and it will influence how I vote in the council elections.

If that council school place planning paper someone posted a while back is anything to go by it's very clear they need to do both. Every child needs a school place, and they all need to be good school places. There's just not enough money in the pot what with the recession, the Brexit war chest and the Tories' refusal to raise taxes from people who can afford to pay more.

@Rainbows55
The reason is progress 8.
What some members are talking about in the chat is pure attainment (A*-C / 4-9).
Progress 8 measures what value a school adds.
Attainment measures raw results.

Say school Z has A*-C is 80% and progress 8 is 0.8.
And, school Y whose A*-C is 80% and progress 8 is -0.03.

School Z is doing a better job.

Ted sch progress is average -0.03, which is average, not good.

It is not a case of being able to add less value because the children come in on higher results (from KS2 exams).

Each grade achieved has a different weighting so if a child is targeted an A (7.0 points) and they get an A their progress is 0 if they get an A* (8.5) their progress is 1.5. And so on. More here: www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/561021/Progress_8_and_Attainment_8_how_measures_are_calculated.pdf

Headteachers who say it is not even playing field should to be challenged.

Attainment (4-9 A*-C) is not a true measure of the impact a school is having on students’ lives.

Waldegrave, Grey Court and OP are making a difference. Also, the most vulnerable children, SEN and those have Free Meals (the deprived) ... a good school doesn’t fail them; the 3 schools mentioned above make a difference for the majority of children.

Why would a school not faciliate staff completion the annoynous questionnaire?

@justtw2 I don’t understand about the questionnaire but the report says they spoke to a lot of teachers in person. Re the progress 8 I’m led to believe by a friend that for complicated reasons this score was affected by Teddington’s previous head’s decision not to steer the children to fill Ebacc buckets or steer their choices at all in a way that would make it easier for the school to attain good progress scores under the new way of assessing progress. Apparently their progress score in the year before was fine but it was just under the new method of assessing it that it dropped. She also says that disadvantaged children and prior low attainers scored very highly in Maths and English. So I’m confused as that must mean they progressed pretty well?? It’s all so complicated!

Hi, if you look at detailed Tedd results, these are some of the findings:

progress 8 significantly higher:

girls +0.29 (note 2016 progress 8 was also ~ 0.3 for girls)
EAL pupils +0.24

progress 8 significantly lower:

boys -0.31
disadvantaged pupils -0.28
prior middle attainers -0.21

There are many other striking things in the statistics... the percentage of prior high attainers is quite high (so these are the kids coming in with high SATs). Basically 2 in 3 children (155 out of 237) were prior high attainers when they joined Teddinton school. Their attainment 8 score was significantly higher than the rest of the children, however their progress score was average at 0.02.

The proportion of prior middle attainers was only 25% (60 children) and their progress 8 was terrible at -0.21.
And there were only 16 prior lower attainers (roughly 7%) but with good progress 8 at +0.2.

However, for both low and middle attainers the confidence interval is very high (simply because the number of children the statistic is based on is very low) - so really these progress 8 scores should be taken with a grain of salt for low and middle attainers.

For the high attainers though, the number of children included in the sample (155) is high enough for a more robust statistic, so that 0.02 progress score really confirms that the school does not add much value. "Coasting along its demographics", someone said earlier... Two thirds of the Teddington school intake comes in at a high level from primaries and the school doesn't help them realize or exceed their potential. That's the 2017 picture anyway...

@tw11 v interesting, thank you. What I don’t understand perfectly is the confidence intervals stuff. I understand only small sample but of those children eirher the children make the progress or not surely? Also what I don’t understand is how the progress 8 is affected by subject choice - ie not steering children to GCSE choices that would give better chance of higher progress 8 scores, which a friend tells me Teddington didn’t.

It look looks like its progress results are similar to, but in some categories better than, Christ’s. And it is much better than Bristol Free School. Both the other schools have been rated good, but not as recently.