Russell Education Trust/Russell Group Universities

[strictlyfan2013]

Can anyone confirm if the Free School sponsor "Russell Education Trust" is linked to the Russell Group Universities please? Also, what does "State funded independent school" mean? In relation to Free Schools... Thanks!

If I were looking for places for my DCs, I wouldn't touch my local RET with a bargepole. I've looked at the staffing structure and there are too many non-qualified staff

They don't employ unqualified staff at all, so I don't know where you've got the idea that they do.

I've just looked at the websites for each of the RET schools - it is not possible to tell whether the teachers are qualified teachers or not.
NB Degrees and doctorates are not evidence of qualification to teach.

I'm looking forward to the Russell Group checking the rationale for the name.

Yes, they do employ unqualified staff!!! So get off your high horse!

I agree that it doesn't give the qualifications of the teachers, but look at the number of teaching assistants! I wouldn't send any child of mine to a school which employs such a high ratio of teaching assistants. Maybe that's just me!

Doh! I do know that degrees and doctorates aren't evidence of qualification to teach.

daphnedill
I wouldn't send any child of mine to a school which employs such a high ratio of teaching assistants. Maybe that's just me!
I'm not sure what you mean by that.
Many of the assistants could be attached to SEN pupils or reading support or help in the library
and in a calss of 30 there will be one teacher and up to three assistants
that's not necessarily a bad thing
it depends on how they are used

daphnedill, they don't employ unqualified teachers in their schools. On their Brentford school website here I counted 18 teachers, which is a high teacher-pupil ratio for 300 children (their staff will increase each year). Teaching assistants and administrative staff etc are in addition to those.

they don't employ unqualified teachers in their schools
Prove It.

"Prove It."

I can't. They have told me they don't. Prove that they do.

The unis met in a location in Russell square,hence the name,Russell group

Wrigglingandgiggling
I can't. They have told me they don't. Prove that they do.
Then you clearly have lower standards than I .
I do not just accept assertions - I demand evidence.
If they are not willing to post the qualifications of their teachers on their website (as many other schools do) I will always assume that they have something to hide.

I think Talkin has a point. How difficult can it be to add "PGCE" to the "BSc" or "BEd" after someone's name? I would hope that the TAs are also qualified and again, there should be no issue listing what level they have attained. I find it quite shocking that it can be considered acceptable NOT to publish basic biographical information about owners/trustees/teachers of any school, be it a free school or any other kind.

"Then you clearly have lower standards than I . I do not just accept assertions - I demand evidence"

Then you should look for evidence that they don't employ qualified teachers before you publicly spread doubt on the matter. There is nothing in their adverts that suggests they encourage unqualified applicants, and they get a lot of applicants (500 at Hove for 8 positions), so there is no reason to suspect they might need to. Other than that I have no reason to doubt their word, or what they have said publicly at parents' evenings and similar events, or online.

I've just looked at my local secondary school websites and they don't publish detailed qualifications for all of their staff either. They're all converter academies, or transformational academies, so have just as much freedom to employ unqualified teachers as free schools (which are just newly created academies).

wrigglingandgiggling
and they get a lot of applicants (500 at Hove for 8 positions)
believe what you want to believe - its a faith school after all.

I'm an auditor.
I make my living by getting past the puff and ascertaining the truth.
The link to their website you quoted says
Yes – we will employ qualified teachers with a range of experience.
but note the lack of the word only / exclusively
so to fit with that assertion, only one of their teachers needs to be qualified
does not fill me with assurance

And as for the local schools
They're all converter academies, or transformational academies, so have just as much freedom to employ unqualified teachers as free schools
they do indeed have that freedom because the idiot gove wants to de professionalise teaching but only for staff recruited after conversion and before Ofsted put a spanner in those works.

"I make my living by getting past the puff and ascertaining the truth"

As an auditor you would need evidence to back up claims of wrongdoing.

indeed, but a lack of transparency is the first thing to look for

just ask the lady who is spending Christmas in prison this year and next as a result of my work

"The link to their website you quoted says: Yes – we will employ qualified teachers with a range of experience"

The link I quoted says "Despite the recruitment freedoms available to free schools and academies, we can confirm that only qualified teachers will be employed".

"indeed, but a lack of transparency is the first thing to look for. just ask the lady who is spending Christmas in prison this year and next as a result of my work"

Perhaps, but she was presumably convicted based on more concrete evidence. I hope you didn't spread doubt about her on Mumsnet before she was convicted.

"Spreading doubt on Mumsnet"
hmmmm
you clearly believe everything they say
I am awaiting concrete evidence in support of the assertions
if that evidence is forthcoming, other than them being god botherers I have no problem with them
oh, except that Free schools are a looming car crash of accountability and governance

"you clearly believe everything they say"

You are clearly determined to disbelieve everything they say. I have been working with them for the last 2 years and have no reason to doubt it. You are politically opposed to free schools, so want to believe that everyone associated them is dishonest.

"other than them being god botherers .."

They provide the educational support to local groups wanting to set up their own schools. Some of their schools are faith schools and others aren't. That is defined by the local group, rather than by RET.

I have been working with them for the last 2 years
and yet you have not sought evidence and proof.

so why ARE they passing themselves off as a famous University grouping?

"and yet you have not sought evidence and proof."

Of what? That they won't employ unqualified teachers in the future? It's not possible to prove that. But they have said that they won't.

I haven't hunted down the CVs of their existing teachers any more than I have done for other local schools, but then nobody has ever doubted it before you started throwing around mud on Mumsnet. In the light of your attack I will certainly suggest to them that they put some additional information on the school websites, but I think it's reasonable to expect them to finish their Christmas holidays first.

"so why ARE they passing themselves off as a famous University grouping?"

They're not. Any more than Russell Grant is passing himself off as a famous university grouping, or Russell Investments, or Hotel Russell, or Russell Europe, or Russells of Clapton.

(e.g. if an English specialist teacher has Latin or Mandarin as her secondary subject, those might be added to the curriculum).

Which is a very silly way to build a school's curriculum. What happens if the English teacher leaves or, worse, goes long-term sick? Do you look for an English teacher who can recruit Mandarin? Small pool, to put it mildly. Do you recruit a part-time Mandarin teacher, and if so, out of what budget? Or do you just drop the subject?

One of our local comps played this game, and offered all sorts of languages which sounded terribly impressive. Not a single child, over the course of some years, took one through to GCSE, because to teacher who happened to be able to do a bit of whatever stayed long enough, and the school simply couldn't recruit replacements.

A curriculum means stuff the school commits to offer over a sustained period, such that a child arriving in Y7 stands a reasonable chance of being able to take a GCSE in it. It doesn't means odds and ends of well-intentioned hobby teaching which depends on the presence of particular well-intentioned teachers?

"Which is a very silly way to build a school's curriculum."

It's the way most new schools build their curriculum. Schools are funded on a per-pupil basis (with some start-up funding for new schools tp stock classrooms with books etc), so when they start with just one year group and build up from there then their curriculum grows with them. It would be the same for a new maintained school, if any were able to be opened at the moment.

Once a school is large enough to support a full time Latin teacher (for example) then there is no reason why they shouldn't employ one in order to maintain continuity. It would be a waste of money for a school with 150 Year 7 pupils (or 300 Y7&8 pupils) to employ a full time Latin teacher (for example) unless they also taught a subsidiary subject.