Concerns at Wychwood School, Oxford - seeking other families

[Galanthus78]

The situation re Wychwood going co-ed is of great concern to my DD who is a pupil at the school, and to us. We've given the powers-that-be a chance to reassure us, and DD has talked extensively with staff; if anything, we've become even more concerned. DD has now asked us to actively seek her a place elsewhere, which seems a real shame after several (mostly) happy years there.

Are there any other parents around?

Specifically, we have 3 main concerns, which I'll go into, below.

My concerns about the abruptness of this major change isn’t negated by your happiness with Wychwood, @Everywhichway2023. Just as, when you talked to the school you were reassured, but when I did, I wasn’t. I recognised the same passion for this change that you did, but I don’t find passion on its own necessarily a reassuring thing, as it can burn out quickly, or be misplaced in the first place. To me, passionate leadership must be underpinned by consultation with stake holders, to enable informed, strategic decision making, which should then be communicated clearly and with viable time-scales. Unfortunately I’ve found all of that conspicuous by its absence, and as such, I’ve lost trust.
As my child’s education (encompassing not just academics but also her emotional well being) is of utmost importance to me, I need to be able to trust her school, as does she, and now we’ve lost it and don’t know how to regain it, not because of going co-ed in itself but because of the way it was communicated and the absurdly short timeframe.
I can’t stop thinking about a scenario where DD was halfway through GCSEs or Alevels when this announcement was made, and how therefore we would be severely limited in options to move her. Someone on Mumsnet is in that position and her DD is struggling massively, as there is disruption whether she goes or stays, at a time when stability is so vital.

Finally, it’s unfair to accuse me of bringing Wychwood’s name “into the mud”. I’ve been incredibly supportive of Wychwood; I spend a lot of money sending my daughter there, and more besides. But they brought scrutiny on themselves by instigating this abrupt change, and a talk forum for parents is a perfectly legitimate place for me to discuss it.

@Shelefttheweb
Look at what I said ages ago on this thread! They are into property. The company is run by chartered surveyors. It’s a prime site in Oxford. They are going through the motions of “doing something”. When it fails, it will be redeveloped. When I looked, the government stats said 108 on roll. That can never be financially viable. It has space for 165.

I think girls who want to be boys is the new market or boys who want to be girls. Not your standard boy. It will be a haven type school for trans children so it’s usp will change. Is already changing perhaps? There are so many other choices in this area I cannot see many actively choosing it.

The writing is on the wall for this one. The company that bought them gives zero fucks. Parents are kidding themselves if they think things won't massively change and with zero consultation. It's a shame.

The more digging on the financial side I’ve done, since comments on here a few days ago, the less I’ve been worried about imminent collapse, TBH. From the trustees reports it’s clear it was always planned and budgeted to spend £1.1m on developing the school site further - that’s happening this summer to make it co-ed. It leads me to think that taking it co-ed to improve student numbers was always the plan, (which makes sense, knowing the local market) rather than being the sudden knee-jerk panic that the lack of consultation and poor communications have made it appear.

I think that their inexperience in the sector has lead the board to misunderstand the parents - yes there is an immense amount of love for the school, and a strong sense of feeling like a family. Underneath that there has been some caution about the company investing in it and having a new head, but everyone has been giving them all the benefit of the doubt, rather than expressing their caution aloud. Not realising the concern, the board seemed to assume that everyone will immediately affirm this decision and jump on board enthusiastically. So they didn’t bother consulting or phasing in or working out a comms strategy. And now they’re on the back foot, with a new strategy of calling every family in the school to beg them to come in for a meeting with the head, to be reassured. But there’s no concrete reassurance available, because it comes down to “we’re passionate about this and no it’s right and you should trust us”.
Some families will trust them wholeheartedly. Some will give them limited trust, and wait and see. And others, like me, feel our trust is broken enough that it’s not worth the risk to wait and see.

Having said that, if there are other aspects I’ve missed on the financials, please, please PM me!

I agree it doesn’t look so much like it is at risk of imminent financial collapse. Instead it is at risk of rapid decision-making by the owners. This could be to go co-Ed, change to a sixth-form college, focus on international markets, sell the building and move somewhere else/close, become a niche ‘trans’ school, or a foreign language one, sell to someone else... I guess though at the moment they will try to run with coed for a couple of years and see what happens.

it is at risk of rapid decision-making by the owners is exactly what’s been bothering me, @Shelefttheweb. You’ve put your finger right on it.
And maybe this seemingly rapid decision making to go co-ed was not that rapid, and based on sound strategic reasons. But since it’s been sprung on us, and our DD’s, it’s exposed the risk, and called into question the judgement of the leadership. Alongside, for some of us, our specific concerns about an ideology that’s entered the school where “gender identity” trumps sex, which was also reinforced by their messaging about going co-ed, and makes it difficult for us to raise specific concerns about integrating boys; if someone doesn’t recognise sex then how can they combat sexism?

@TizerorFizz My impression is that there is very little expansion space available on the site, so it’s more a case of reconfiguration of the existing buildings than erecting new ones, but I haven’t looked at the plans in detail.

I think it's already been mentioned on here or on the other thread that it doesn't seem to be financials at the moment, that can obviously change very quickly. I do agree with what others have said, it seems they want a school that caters to the growing trans population and immediately releasing places for all genders is one way of doing that. I think they have grossly misjudged the level of support and empathy parents are willing to give in this area though. They've really bitten the hand that feeds them and treated parents like an easily replaceable commodity that doesn't need to be respected.

@Galanthus78
Erecting new ones increases the footprint.

However I agree it’s a niche market they are going for.

It is all about financials:

E3 Capital Partners (‘E3’) is an independent and privately owned property company that specialises in a select number of specifically researched alternative investment strategies by which we are able to add value through superior knowledge and operational capability.

Our investment strategies seek to create and nurture businesses within the alternative real-estate space, using our knowledge of corporate and real-estate markets with a view to delivering long-term value as both an owner and operator.

Driving net operating income (NOI) is a fundamental part of delivering both corporate and real-estate performance. We believe that this is best achieved through the direct experience of owning, managing and advising businesses in our chosen sectors. This may include either direct ownership or hands-on strategic advice.

@Shelefttheweb I mean isn't that the case with all investments though? Financials?

Yes. But not the case with all private schools. Many run as charities so not-for-profit focused on their educational objectives and excess income is reinvested. With investments they don’t need to go insolvent to be deemed a failure - they just need to generate less profit/increased asset value than alternative investment opportunities.

@Shelefttheweb Ah I see. Wychwood is a charity though so I assume their investments are probably limited and have to be reinvested, but I know nothing and to be honest not sure this is adding anything to the OPs question as she has decided to move on.

The school used to be a charity. In 2020 the charity sold half of the school. The school is now a company of its own, 51% owned by the larger company with 3 seats on the board, and 49% owned by the charity with 2 seats on board.

The larger company says on their website that they want to expand further into the education space. Being aware of that for a while, I assumed it meant they would be disinclined from closing the school to turn a quick profit on the site, or making other rapid changes, as their actions at Wychwood would be under scrutiny from trustees of other schools they want to invest in. But I think I didn’t allow for their inexperience in the sector.

I want the best for the school and very much hope they get more boys in than the girls they immediately lose, so their viability is not at risk. But I’m removing DD because she wants to stay single sex, and because, as I explained before, they’ve lost our trust in several key ways.

Expanding into education could mean buying up loss making schools for their development potential.

The trans issue came about by stealth- a well-established pupil (year 12) identified as transgender and asked to be addressed as such. This set a precedent with more existing pupils in the school identifying as trans and word spread which drew more external applicants.
I guess the writing was on the wall at that point about going Co-Ed but totally agree their approach to this has generated a great distrust in the management / future plans etc.

For year ending October 2021, the Wychwood School Charity had an income of £61,833. Reduced from £2.39m the year before. @Dodgeitornot Its no longer a charity in the true sense regarding the provision of education.

@TizerorFizz Would that be because the company that bought the 51% took the revenue?
What's the point of leaving 49% to a charity? Taxes?

@Dodgeitornot
Lots of private schools are charities. They do this to get £0 vat I believe. Plenty has been written about charitable status for schools and what it means. It has big advantages.

If I was a parent, I would want to query what exactly how the the charity now operates and what it intends to do with such a tiny income. It’s clearly not 49% of anything. What does that mean anyway? It’s either a charity or not. I’m wondering if the charity is now the equivalent of the uniform shop. It has spent money and received money. Buildings hire to other schools? What is it’s purpose? I think the parents should be asking for more info on the charity and how this sits alongside the controlling company, which presumably now has the £2.4m income and associated school expenditure.

@TizerorFizz Yh I know they are. I was referring to OPs previous post. I'm sure most parents spending this much money on their kids education, especially at such a turbulent time for the school, will be checking it's finances thoroughly.

It seems to me lots of people on this thread are commenting without any actual experience of the school. It is true that there are a relatively high proportion of trans pupils at Wychwood, but this is probably due to the fact that it has an unusually inclusive and tolerant environment which attracts people who in other schools may have been bullied or felt marginalised. My DD has been there for a number of years and is very happy. Pupils accept everyone without question, whatever their stated identity might be. The pastoral environment is excellent. The value added in terms of academic achievement is outstanding - not everyone gets the highest grades, but they probably get the highest they are capable of. It is an all ability school, with some super bright kids, and others who are not so academic. It is a fantastic school for building up a child's self-confidence. Parents were disconcerted by the move to co-education, but DD tells me the pupils themselves are fine with it. Not sure it is entirely for financial reasons - the school is doing pretty well at the moment. It is really a question of adjusting to widening demand in the community for co-education - and also that there are few small, nurturing schools like Wychwood for boys in Oxfordshire.

Pupils accept everyone without question

I would be concerned if my daughter was like this. So much for ‘stranger danger’

"Pupils accept everyone without question"
Except the pupils for which the school was originally created for and an investor with their own agenda.