Dunottar/ Reigate Grammar - Merger, or what?

[quandry]

Got the letter today, and I have to say I don't really understand what is going on?
Is RGS bailing out Dunottar to save it going under?
I can't see the advantages for RGS at all?

Someone suggested that perhaps they'd make it co-ed, less academic school in the future (like a Box Hill in Reigate?) and share facilities more? (Sports fields closer than Hartswood?)

An exempt charity is one that isn't subject to supervision by the charities commission, it's still has to use the profits for the benefit of the charity though.

Also stated in the accounts of UL is 'the sole activity of UL is to advance, for the public benefit, education in the UK' so not really a corporate money making monster.

The biggest criticism that can usually be laid at the door of the big "corporate" charities is the level of remuneration paid to their CEO's, but in reality these individuals would earn similar or more if they were employed by non-charitable organisations - they are being remunerated for their skills.

unitedlearning.org.uk/News/TabId/92/ArtMID/476/ArticleID/126/The-great-divide-–-Jon-Coles-on-independent-schools-and-academies.aspx

Article from Chief Exec on why UL keep independant schools and academies separate and the reasons why they wouldn't change independant schools into an academy.
So reading this it confirms the thinking behind UL and that they wouldn't turn D into an academy.

Angelline, I have apologised. I asked a question about the accuracy of the information. I have been told it is incorrect. Thank you. It will be clear to people reading this thread that it is incorrect. However I did have to ask to know. It's the kind of thing that is never going to be reported by DV or other official sources. Again, I apologise. I asked the question because the person who told me was so sure and speaking from a position of concern. I will be more careful in future.

Any kind of school could be seen as 'for the public benefit' even one totally different to Dunottar, such as a mixed co ed independent school, or a free school or an academy. If UL did any of these things, it would be within its remit. Just beware, that remit is very broad and can mean lots of things, which are not necessarily what campaigners imagine it means.

A wise colleague once told me that one of the major symptoms of stress and exhaustion is paranoia. Maybe that's why these threads burst into flames sometimes, as people read into and misread others' words.
Will fill glass or two with a cheeky Chenin Blanc now.
And thanks for calming tones

I would not be surprised if it became a state academy: there seem to be enough private school places around here, but the state infant and junior schools are bursting at the seams, and the children will come through to senior schools soon.

I may have missed it but I don't think there is anything from UL that says they undertake that it will never under any circumstances become a state school, and why should they if there is a great demand for a state school, and much less demand (it seems) for a private school on the site.

;)

I really don't understand why people get at each other on here? Making comments which don't appear to have any knowledge behind them, a few people sniping at a group of parents who just want to try and secure a good future for Dunottar and in turn, their children. What other perspective should this DV group be presenting other than their own? Their website is informative based on what they 'know', ive looked at it. For other perspectives surely if people want to know what they are, they need to ask the other parties involved? If members of DV are subject to a non disclosure restriction I would imagine they didnt ask for that? Wouldn't that have been other parties involved? And if so, why? Why also be negative about co ed & make remarks about Dunottar parents wanting to keep the school in any form? It appears that it is a fact that the single sex option is not what is required in Reigate from the outcome of their survey, so why would they want to pursue single sex? That would just be silly and no doubt they would be ridiculed for pursuing it? At least they are being realistic. And resourceful. I don't see what others seem to see on here....the remarks about twitter and FB etc? I mean, everyone has their role right? I'm quite sure the people representing DV on social media are not also the strategists, lawyers & accountants, or those beavering away constructing business plans. Because they are, no doubt, beavering away building business plans? So would you really expect the social media administrator to be giving out chunks of serious information? I wouldn't. I would expect them to buoy the Dunottar followers with whatever updates they can, keep them informed of how they can be involved and help etc, until such time that they are in a position, presumably on instructions from those higher up in their group, to give more info? Also, questions have been raised re their fundraising? From what I've seen on their twitter, they are raising money for legal fees. Looks like they've been pretty clear about what its for, so they obvs have good reason to think its necessary, doesn't look to me like they are just randomly asking for funds. Ive also seen nothing from them to suggest there is any bad vibes re RGS school or kids? Certainly not thru their media, you can't stop what kids say on their own feeds, and that works both ways, both schools. My interpretation is that these parents feel the governors may not have acted in their best interest and seem to have a conflict of interest, that's the governors, not parents or pupils of RGS? If I was in their shoes, if its true that RGS haven't invested any money into Dunottar and could close their school and gain from it, id be angry, I'd feel betrayed, I'm not sure I'd be as dignified as they are being, rah rah or not, good for them! And yes, I would probably have a little bit of me that wouldn't want the other school to have any further involvement. Glad I've got that off my chest. I admire them. Some people are high flyers, some bake great cakes. Basically they are trying to do what they feel is right. And, if they succeed, when my children are school age, I will be pleased to consider their school because of, and not in spite of, all of this. And if they don't, well good on them for not rolling over at the first sign of trouble. Or is it just me ;) x

Bo. You are a tonic. Can't wait to welcome your kids to our school.

Bo, you're a breath of fresh air. Good to hear a reasoned response based on the facts.

Bo - such a level headed response to all that has been said on this site and I echo Tired - can't wait for your children to join us!

I'd agree that the only sniping I've seen vs RGS is on here. It is very difficult as a bystander to distinguish between those activities sanctioned by those heading up DV and those who are just passionate about the school and keeping it going. Some of what has been said on here, for example, seems to be rather more emotionally charged than official statement and website. Others more local to the school have cited a leaflet campaign as a possibly counterproductive.

if they succeed, when my children are school age, I will be pleased to consider their school because of, and not in spite of, all of this. I hope that is the case for others too. To succeed everyone , including those with girls already at the school, needs to take a fresh look at what is on offer. For some it won't suit but I hope there won't be hard feelings held against any parent who removes their child thinking it will no longer work for them.

Just to clarify , would I be right in thinking that the proposal would be two fold: potentially extricate D from the RGS relationship if it is no longer felt to be mutually beneficial and consider financial and/or management investment from interested parties one of whom is currently UL.

I'd agree with Liz - the very worst sniping has been on here ( and was what drew me into this discussion in the first place). For those of us who have families more closely involved I think there has been offline sniping going on too however in the local community. The problem is that there are 200 angry and emotional sets of parents out there looking for someone to blame.
I understand that, and would probably feel the same if the boot was on the other foot etc.
In my view some of the earlier DV communications were inflammatory, based on just one particular interpretation of the facts, and designed to put a slur on the current trustees. As the DV 'machine' cranked into action, these were the only 'facts' being spread around via media and word of mouth, and the risk is that they would become tacitly accepted as the only truth if they remained unchallenged at some level. This seemed to be a useful forum to do this.
In the absence of any initial public response from the governors I think a few people who have had different discussions and different points of view felt it was important to share those to balance out the DV take on things. These situations are never quite as they first appear - black or white - and I make no apology for the fact that I have chosen to offer a different view of the facts, based on my contacts and my conversations with both governors and parents.
We've already seen that there seem to be very different interpretations regarding numbers of pupils and projected shortfalls. And as has been already pointed out, the DV survey had its limitations and shouldn't be relied upon as a serious piece of research on which to base solid future projections.
I know more will become clear over the coming weeks. I'm sure we can expect more from DV - I think they will be keen to issue some sort of statement before Half Term to try to stem further losses, and I understand the DV team are quite divided about the approach they should now take.

Agreeing to disagree for the moment is probably all we can do!

Why does anyone need to agree to disagree? Personally, I would ignore any silly comments & cantankerous folk who perhaps aren't too clear about what is happening here as its all too easy to get drawn in to pointless conversations, whichever school they represent, because their comments don't help anyone. They just wind people up that in reality, have absolutely no reason to have any beef with each other? Why can't we all, follow with interest, furnish ourselves with as much 'actual' information as we can, from all parties, then see what we think? I don't see this group DV looking to point blame at anyone other than the body that they are suggesting is responsible for this situation, which as far as I can tell from all their info, is the governors? Which I'm guessing is less than 10 individuals? I'm sure we will all get to know pretty much everything pretty soon and then we can see how we feel. I just keep thinking, maybe, just maybe, you could have a few Dunottar parents acting foolishly and emotionally, frantically trying to save a failing school at any cost, but 200? 200 people doing all they say they are doing without very good reason to think that something is not right? I want to learn what has taken place to lead to this point, digest it, then pass judgement, particularly as, if it is the case that both boards share governors, and both schools will hopefully be relevant to my kids in 10 years time, and it turns out may not have acted correctly in some way, that will have an impact on where I feel comfortable placing my kids. I want to trust people in a position of trust, don't you? This for me is the main element to all of this that I need to understand. Thankfully, its a way off for me, I don't have the time pressures these parents have. They may well be doing us reigate parents all a huge favour in clarifying whether the people running our schools are right and proper, so in a way it will serve a useful purpose whatever their outcome?

The thing is why are people looking to blame someone?!
No one is to blame, it's just circumstance that has happened, the school has been making financial losses since 2009 with declining pupil numbers, blame the economy, blame the people that decide not to send their children there, there is no blame, many schools have been in the same situation and have had to close or merge in order to continue. I'm sure the governors make the best decisions they can at the time with all the information they have at that time. No one has a crystal ball.

Within all this, I have been thinking too about the parents who HAVE moved their girls in the last year.
I wonder how they feel in all this. Upthread, someone spoke as a parent of a child in the Junior section that was closed down, and how they had felt that the secondary parents ignored their pleas to look at a range of options to save the whole school, rather than merge with RGS, a year ago. I wonder what they think about it all now. Are they part of the campaign to save it or not?
I also wonder about the parents of secondary pupils who have left in the last year. How do they feel about Dunottar and what has been the reaction of Dunottar parents to them going. I wonder if they are glad they have left. And if they are supporting the Dunottar campaign now. There must be a mixture of responses, and it can't always be easy for people to accept that some have chosen differently to themselves.

Everyone wants to do the best for their child. The position our own child(if we have one) is in affects our view of the whole thing. Current parents at Dunottar understandably want to prevent their children from going through a change of school they had not planned, if possible. Some are hanging on, for a plan which keeps Dunottar going. Some have assessed the situatuation and decided to jump now. Without all of these difficulties, they probably wouldn't have, but assessed it and decided perhaps that they couldn't risk closure in the summer or a long drawn out uncertainty or the school being taken over and becoming something unknown. They didn't like the lack of control they had over it all, so reluctantly moved to re establish that control. In a far from ideal situation, they judged this to be the best option for their children.

And if Dunottar stays open in one form or another, prospective parents will also want the best for their children. They will weigh everything up....the past, the present and what looks likely in the future of each school...and then they will choose. People do make different decisions. A poster just upthread, seems to say that the struggles Dunottar has gone through, would draw her to look at it. Perhaps the struggle will draw others too, to look. They may well like what they see....sounds like most people who visit, do like the atmosphere. They may visit too, because the idea of choice is a good one, which they support. But they won't actually choose to send their child to Dunottar due to a poin t of principle. Everyone will do what seems best for their children. Many like the idea of Dunottar and would like to see it stay open. I am included in that group, because choice is good. People generally though, don't actually send their children to a school to make a point of their principles, (or even keep them there, due to principles) and me included, I would choose what seemed the best school for my child and have to consider the past, present and likely future of the school to influence my final decision. Most of us, at the end of the day are pragmatic. We do what is best for our child, at the point where decisions have to be made. We have imperfect information and have to just do the best we can, with the knowledge we have. And I do feel extremely sorry for those parents at Dunottar now (and in the last year) who must have had so many internal struggles about what the best thing is.....because not knowing the future, must be so hard. Hats off to you all, whatever you have decided or are deciding.

Bo - I'm afraid your post shows exactly why it is really important that the issues surrounding the Dunottar consultation SHOULD BE publicly debated and shared. At the moment you are simply spouting back what you have been spoon fed by the DV team.

Of course 200+ parents are going to want to try to save their school. Who would happily accept that they have to put their daughters through the pain of changing schools/ friends/ disrupting exam courses etc if they thought they might not have to?

But why try to pin the blame on the current governors? If anyone should shoulder the responsibility for the situation today, it is the governors and management team of five years ago who failed to act swiftly when the downward trend began. Why were parents kept in the dark, rather than alerted and asked to help at that point? A DV action team five years ago could have made a HUGE difference.

The expectations of the RGS group and the new, interim, trustees after the crisis 18 months ago are simply unreasonable. There isn't any evidence that RGS promised to do anything other than underwrite a period of comfort during which the full situation could be properly assessed. Anyone who took on a business which had been so spectacularly mismanaged over many years would do the same.

What the trustees are now doing is the perfectly reasonable, rational response to the financial picture that has now emerged. Faced with the possibility of having to cover perhaps £0.5m in losses over the next two years (probably the minimum time period to begin to reverse the
trend?) they have, quite rightly, declared a consultation on the option to close.

Of course current parents are shocked and don't like it, but any sensible, commercially-minded organisation would do the same (United Learning included, I'll wager a bet!).

So to vilify the current governors in an attempt to apportion blame is, quite frankly, pathetic. Yes, I accept that we can raise questions about the manner in which some of the communication may have happened, but at the end of the day it doesn't change the fact that the roots of the current problem grew long before any of the new governors were appointed.

If people absolutely have to blame someone then try the previous administration, who are probably relieved to be well out of it!

As I said in my very first post, I know a number of the governors, and they are all decent people, who are finding this as difficult, complicated and distressing as most of the people involved. To paint them as morally and ethically questionable is simply wrong.

And Bo - yes - I too want to be able to trust those in charge to make correct decisions, and to me, the decision not to take on a financial loss of £0.5m is a very, very good decision indeed!

Personally, I think the outcome of all this is that Dunottar will NOT close after all, and that a co-ed solution, with, or without UL, will be the way forward. However it would make sense for the DV team to equally engage with all potential providers, and not just jump aboard the first shiny new bandwagon that happens to be passing.

Wombat - X posted, but just wanted to say I agree totally with your last 5/6 lines. I don't envy anyone in the situation, and wish a speedy conclusion.

But I will continue to try to defend what I think has been a particularly nasty angle of this campaign.

NikkiSurrey: 'But I will continue to try to defend what I think has been a particularly nasty angle of this campaign.' Is this because you 'know a number of the governors'? From your comments upthread, you clearly have a strongly pro-RGS stance and you are not as neutral and objective as you claim to be. How come you're so close to the governors? You've outed yourself as an RGS employee. By the way, I know the real Nikki who has children at RGS and a neice at Dunottar and it isn't you. I won't be posting on this thread again.

Nikki, I agree with you. Public debate is absolutely necessary, and of all the info from all parties. The trouble is, I can't find anything from anyone other than the Dunottar group, can you? Where have you read more from RGS? Can you send me links please?

That is my point. I absolutely want to know everything, I want to understand. That is why my posts are full of questions.

Re governors. If you are referring to those that appear to have struck a rather imbalanced deal with RGS (no financial investment + close school = acquire assets), then yes, I agree with you, that would be the previous trustees if the parent group feels the need to blame. But if you are referring to current trustees consulting to close dunottar because they have been unable to find a solution to dunottars problems in a year, when parents have in a matter of weeks, then that I would say is the current trustees. And when considering the implications of closure I.e. my sum above, I can kind of see where this strength of feeling from parents is coming from, can't you?

I don't know, you seem to have more insight than me, and know the governors? Perhaps I'm missing something....

Re painting people a certain way. This is about actions, that have either taken place or they haven't, if all has been done right then people's characters will be in tact I'm sure :)

NikkiSurrey- I agree with everything you have said all along on this thread, well written and explained especially in your last post. I don't know any governors personally but a friend neighbour of mine does and he says the same as you have in regards to previous governors and management of the school.
Quite glad that Angelina ballerina won't be posting anymore if all she can do is throw accusations around.

Bo
Here is a newspaper article with an interview with chair of governors if you haven't seen it, it may help
www.surreymirror.co.uk/External-private-school-operators-Reigate-s/story-20566813-detail/story.html

Sorry, meant to add. I'm sure that your friends who are governors are really nice people & and I wouldn't wish stress on anyone. Being a governor comes with a massive amount of responsibility and by its nature makes them accountable. I wouldn't want to be one. Hopefully they will have done everything by the book and therefore won't need to be held accountable. Its a horrid time for a lot of people and I hope for everyone's sake its over soon :) good for you for standing up for your friends too, I hope they appreciate your loyalty x

Thank you lucky pup. I have seen that yes :)