Four New Academies in East Dulwich

[Marmora Man]

In my experience union officials are less concerned with quality of output than certainty of employment. So yes - I do not see the NUT as a force for good in education.

[DaveR]

Everybody is entitled to post whatever they want - I was just making the point that if you are an advocate for a particular point of view, and you have an interest in the outcome, you should say so. The NUT is likely to see it's influence significantly diminished if a large number of schools become academies, and that gives MD an interest. It's also fair to say that the principals behind the anti-academy alliance are less than open about their affiliations, on the particular website referred to at least.

[Alec John Moore]

I am really keen on transparency and would hope that posters on this forum would be clear about their interest in an issue. My interest is firstly in the education of my children but I also want a public education system that is good for the community and the country. What I don't like is being a political pawn in an ideological tussle between Kingsdale and Southwark. That would certainly be one way of characterising our experience of the secondary school transfer process we have been through over the last 6 months or so. I'm confident from what I've seen and heard about secondary schools in this part of London that my children will have a positive, fulfilling experience that will really help them develop educationally and as individuals. I am concerned that enabling a free - er market for schools to attract the children who will help them achieve their outstanding status will leave some schools struggling to survive.

[Penguin68]

If schools are struggling to survive because they are offering poorer education than other schools which offer free schooling - i.e. if schools aren't doing as good a job as others, then they should either improve or, indeed, collapse. No school has a 'right' to survive if it isn't doing a good job. Over time the quality of offers from all schools in a locale will tend to improve (that's the normal effect of competition in a relatively free market). The downside is that 'over time' might well include that time when you have children at school - so that your children could suffer during this transition state. Of course you can try to transfer your children to the schools performing well, and a 'free' mrket would mean that you could do this outwith attempts by local authorities to block such moves, but moving schools is always difficult for the children being moved.

Having said that, it is clear that discussions on other threads about 'good' and 'bad' schools locally - and problems of children being forced to go into 'bad' schools suggests that the status quo isn't working - the option for third parties to set up schools where the alternatives aren't attractive, setting their own agendas as to size etc. could well lead to 'good' schools emerging and 'bad' schools failing.

The fact that these new schools will not be able to select on academic merit stops them becoming old-style grammer schools turning existing secondary schools into effective secendary moderns from having been true comprehensives - if these schools find themselves 'struggling' - then they need to improve their offer and perhaps fit it closer to the needs of the children they do have. The straightjacket of obsessive targets is soon to be removed from all schools, allowing them to focus on their 'customers'' needs more closely. Schools that don't want to bother to change will go to the wall, eventually, if what they are offering isn't sufficient. Actually, good.

Institutions which only poorly serve their consitituents should fail, where they cannot or will not, improve.

Oh, and to suggest that 'bad' schools are 'bad' because of the quality of the children who go to them is like saying that 'good' hospitals are good because they only take nearly well people, and bad hospitals bad because they tend only the very sick. But that's the tendancy of many arguments I have heard.

There are many excellent schools who take children from challenging backgrounds (through poverty, through language difficulties etc., through lack of parental interest in education) and achieve great results.

It is not 'bad' children that make bad schools.

[Fuschia]

Penguin68 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

The downside is that

> 'over time' might well include that time when you

> have children at school - so that your children

> could suffer during this transition state. Of

> course you can try to transfer your children to

> the schools performing well, and a 'free' mrket

> would mean that you could do this outwith attempts

> by local authorities to block such moves

Don't be silly. Every school has a limited capacity, and in most cases families will want a school not too far from home.

[Penguin68]

Don't be silly. Every school has a limited capacity, and in most cases families will want a school not too far from home.

This is (partly) about new schools being opened in competition with existing schools (part of the Michael Gove idea) - so the new schools will not be full (because they are new) and may well be local (because they are competing with failing local schools). They will be looking to recruit pupils at all age levels through the school, at least in some instances.

And schools outside local authority control can decide (obviously taking into account issues of actual available space) how many classes to run in any year group - they are not constrained into not competing with existing schools, quite the contrary, that is their purpose.

[Alec John Moore]

P68, I'm not sure if you are referring to my post, specifically. However, I think we might agree about the limited value of targets in the way they are used currently. The secondary transfer system tries to ensure that all schools recruit cohorts of students who are of a mixed ability. What I've seen in our experience is that the system can be worked, through the award of scholarships before the deadline for applications for instance, to help ensure that the school has some greater say in the recruitment process. The schools know that to achieve outstanding status in their ofsted reports they need to have a number of factors in place. A key one would be capable students who are motivated to learn and succeed in their education. This in turn will attract teachers who are similarly motivated and will have confidence that they are being employed to do what they were trained to do rather than crowd control. I'd like to see a system that values the personal and educational development of children and measures the effectiveness of schools in achieving that. I'm not convinced that a system that would allow the strong to succeed and the weak or uninterested to "go to the wall" would deliver that

[Fuschia]

Alec John Moore Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>. The secondary transfer system

> tries to ensure that all schools recruit cohorts

> of students who are of a mixed ability.

No, it doesn't at all. In most cases (non-church) schools admit based on distance. So it comes down to the nature of the housing stock in the vicinity of the school.

Are the varying results of the schools in Peckham vs Charter for eg, anything to do with the quality of leadership and teaching?

[Alec John Moore]

I was thinking of the banding system that some schools seem to use in different forms and to differing degrees. My son sat a non-verbal reasoning test to set him in a band. This seemed to be a fairly objective, if unpopular with the applicants, way of assessing ability. As I understand it, some schools have to allocate places across the ability bands, thus attempting to establish a mixed ability intake. So, perhaps saying all schools was a bit misleading. Kingsdale, one of the schools in question regarding this thread uses scholarships and random selection as its main means of selecting candidates. The process is much more complex than your response seems to allow. I think that leadership and teaching are key components of the mix that takes schools like Kingsdale and Charter towards Ofsted's outstanding status but you also need committed, motivated, capable students and they can come from any type of housing stock. I speak as someone who was born in a council house and went to an Academy. OK, it was Scotland and many decades ago but I hope you get my point.

[Fuschia]

I work in a school with oustanding leadership, mostly outstanding features and consistently good teaching. We score very well for contextual value added. Yet due to the poverty in the area (family 22/23 of schools - http://fos.dcsf.gov.uk/ for explanation) and majority of pupils not having English as a first language, we fall below 50% A*-C at GCSE and I think we always will.

if schools in the more well off areas of our LEA go the academy route,the topslicing of LA budgets will mean reduced funding for the schools that remain. http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/features/2010/06/back-to-schools/

[Fuschia]

Alec John Moore Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

As I

> understand it, some schools have to allocate

> places across the ability bands, thus attempting

> to establish a mixed ability intake. So, perhaps

> saying all schools was a bit misleading.

I think you will find this method of selection is very rare now. It was the old ILEA system.

Distance is the main criteria in use throughout the state system in most LAs.

This is a fairly old report (2003) http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:XEbWTBExHzoJ:www.risetrust.org.uk/london.pdf+admissions+criteria+uk+schools+distance+criteria+most+common%3F&hl=en&gl=uk&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESi9KWbOag3p4XYMaIDTUrXxk4zFsoQpaP_hRgxFQz4ReP24VioeqqFkFGjmTdamPJ0JfquipCgvPFg1HkNrc5eOnQdbOD9DYhiUwN2sqJDPXxrasEDm6tXWMZXqOJeYKnMqMgkJ&sig=AHIEtbQDw9SIt7Nr32o_H_A3TV56ljS-JQ but states: "A high proportion of schools reported giving priority to siblings and to distance.

♦ Only a minority of schools (5%) selected a proportion of pupils on the basis of ability/aptitude

in a particular subject(s). More foundation and voluntary-aided schools than community or

voluntary-controlled schools selected pupils on this basis. (eg church schools - my note)

Secondary schools are permitted to select pupils in order to gain a balanced intake of pupils

based on their ability; this is commonly termed ?banding?. Overall, 20% of London secondary

schools used some form of banding. This policy is a legacy of the former Inner London

Education Authority."

I think the % of schools using that criteria will have dropped in recent years. Certainly it's not even mentioned in thus recent article: http://www.gettherightschool.co.uk/SecondarySchoolCriteria.html

[Alec John Moore]

I think we might be heading for agreement on this but I'm not sure yet. As far as I can see, I'm a parent not a teacher or an admissions administrator, the banding system is not used as a selection criterion. The over subscription criteria are applied across the bands. I haven't done a detailed analysis but it seemed to be case in the Lewisham and Southwark schools we looked at for our son when we started this last year. I also got a strong impression from our experience that schools work the system to their advantage.

So, will new academy status mean that those schools who achieve that will be able to ditch balanced intake and we will get a "best and the rest" set of schools available to the children in East Dulwich who want to go to secondary school within a reasonable travelling distance?

[Fuschia]

Alec John Moore Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

>

> So, will new academy status mean that those

> schools who achieve that will be able to ditch

> balanced intake and we will get a "best and the

> rest" set of schools available to the children in

> East Dulwich who want to go to secondary school

> within a reasonable travelling distance?

The govt has stated schools will not be allowed to "select" but once you appreciate the extent to which oversubscribed schools DO manage to select by the back door (and at the very least, selection operates by where you can afford to live) any system which filters out money from the mainstream of the state system and puts it into individual schools cannot be to the advantage of the system as a whole. (And in these days of financial stringency, you don't have to be a genius to appreciate that the cash to build new schools or expand "popular" schools will come from the main spending pot to the detriment of others)

If we want every child to have access to a good local school, this isn't the way to do it.

[intexasatthe moment]

Regarding allocating places across the bands and achieving a comprehensive intake - I'm confused .

I thought this ( from a Harris Academy on oversubscription )

The allocation of the remaining places will take place under a framework of fair banding where all applicants will undertake a nonverbal reasoning test. These applicants will be placed in nine ability bands depending on the score an applicant achieves. This process is to ensure a comprehensive intake into the academy.

would ensure a comprehensive intake .

What am I missing ?

Is it because this covers the oversubscription ? Not sure how they do it ,if the nos of year 7 places is 130 ,and only 129 apply can they select those 129 how they like ?

Sorry if being stupid here .

[Fuschia]

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Regarding allocating places across the bands and

> achieving a comprehensive intake - I'm confused .

> I thought this ( from a Harris Academy on

> oversubscription )

> The allocation of the remaining places will take

> place under a framework of fair banding where all

> applicants will undertake a nonverbal reasoning

> test. These applicants will be placed in nine

> ability bands depending on the score an applicant

> achieves. This process is to ensure a

> comprehensive intake into the academy.

> would ensure a comprehensive intake .

> What am I missing ?

> Is it because this covers the

FRom this:

http://www.harrissouthnorwood.org.uk/18/your-new-academy

Where the number of applications is greater than the number of places available, applications will be considered against the criteria set out below.

After the admission of students with Special Educational Needs, where Harris Academy South Norwood is named on the Statement, the criteria will be applied in the order set out below.

Children in care

Nearness to the Academy whilst maintaining the correct number in each ability group

(In order to ensure that the Academy admits students from the full range of abilities, all applicants will take a standardised non-verbal reasoning test. Based upon this, all students will be placed in one of 9 ability groups. The assessment is not a pass or fail test, it is designed to ensure that students of all abilities have an equal chance of gaining a place at the Academy.)

My emphasis in bold.

So for Harris ED, if the same criteria apply... and if oversubscribed...

say there were 360 applications for 180 places, the closest 20 from each ability band would be successful. This would give you a broad spread of abilities... but it wouldn't end up admitting pupils who don't live extremely close to the school (esp as oversubscription for some schools is more along the lines of 4,5,10 applicants for each place, and the distance within which admission takes place is a lot less than a mile)

Kingsdale may have a banding system (as per the old ILEA) but I would be very surprised if many pupils live any great distance from the school. Though the distance may be further for the very gifted or the lowest band...

Nothing in these policies that indicates an equal number of pupils are admitted from each band, either.... and that wouldn't necessarily be very fair either (as most pupils probably fall in the middle and the distribution will mean fewer pupls at the extremities... or if the edge of each band isn't defined by a particular passmark, but a certain % are allocated to each band some bands will have a much broader range of ability than others... in short, this looks like a fair and transparent system, but it's not at all (as people have alluded to who have been through the process)

[intexasatthe moment]

It never crossed my mind that the schools weren't taking an equal number from each band .

And if they don't ,I'm not quite sure of the point of banding .

I'm guessing that KIngsdale's pupils will live some distance away from the school because a lot of the immediate housing is so expensive ( excluding Kingsdale Estate I guess ) that I think most of the residents probably send children to private schools .

But it's all very complicated isn't it .

[Alec John Moore]

It is very complicated and if you are not in the sector then it can come as a bit of a shock. I would recommend starting your research when your oldest child is in year 5. The schools run open days in the autumn and these can be quite revealing and informative. The stats on recruitment - furthest distance from school etc - and exam grades as well as Ofsted reports are all readily available online. Of course, this forum can add some personal experiences to flesh out your understanding. Oh, if you can persuade your child to take up and excel at a musical instrument or a sport then that will improve his/her chances of getting in to the school of your/their choice. Of course, the new academies add a new dimension to the complexity. Watch this space.

[MichaelDavern]

Great debate on this topic, which Is what I hoped when starting it. I am Joint Secretary of Southwark NUT but also an East Dul resident. I just wanted to know what people thought about the issues around academies and having more ofthem around here. This is in advance of the public meeting on the 13th where we can continue the debate in person.

The recent posts of admissions are interesting and I can understand the confusion. No state funded school inclduing an academy can select 100% just the number for its specialism(s) up to 20%. There then should be a range of children in bands for the other non-selected pupils.

[DaveR]

Good to see you back, MD. Do you want to contribute to the debate? What are the benefits of having more power over the running of schools centralised in local authorities? What (in your professional, rather than political view) makes that set up more likely to provide a high quality of education?

[BB100]

Marmora Man Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> In my experience union officials are less

> concerned with quality of output than certainty of

> employment. So yes - I do not see the NUT as a

> force for good in education.

This statement appears correct when on the news yesterday they reported that only 11 teachers have been sacked for incompetance in the past FORTY YEARS. The problems with schools is the teachers are not performance managed. And it is the unions that have managed to prevent it.

[BB100]

Penguin68 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Oh, and to suggest that 'bad' schools are 'bad'

> because of the quality of the children who go to

> them is like saying that 'good' hospitals are good

> because they only take nearly well people, and bad

> hospitals bad because they tend only the very

> sick.

>

> It is not 'bad' children that make bad schools.

Based on recent research about what makes a good school you are correct. It is good parents that help their children that is the key to good outcomes for a child. It is not who parents ARE (rich, poor, middle/working class) it's what they DO to help their children. But they still need good teachers and a good environment to progress.

But if a sick person goes to hospital and refuses to take their medicine properly then they won't get well and will probably blame the hospital.

[BB100]

Fuschia Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I work in a school with oustanding leadership,

> mostly outstanding features and consistently good

> teaching. We score very well for contextual value

> added. Yet due to the poverty in the area (family

> 22/23 of schools - http://fos.dcsf.gov.uk/ for

> explanation) and majority of pupils not having

> English as a first language, we fall below 50%

> A*-C at GCSE and I think we always will.

>

My husband went to school here at 5yrs old knowing no English at all and passed all his GCSE's. Similarly at my secondary school refugees arrived with no English in year 7 and 8 and left with 8 GCSE passes each - all living in relative poverty. Sorry but it is more complicated and ecological than blaming it just on poverty and language. Or what was happening in schools 20-30 years ago that they are not doing now?

[Dulwich_ Park_ Fairy]

The lack of transparency regarding "testing" and "banding" always makes me a bit suspicious, especially when they are only ever brought in once the school has become oversubscribed and can therefore start being selective. My guess is that if you have 5 bands, then 70% of the kids taking the test will end up in the "pot" for the bottom band.

[MichaelDavern]

BB100 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Marmora Man Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > In my experience union officials are less

> > concerned with quality of output than certainty

> of

> > employment. So yes - I do not see the NUT as a

> > force for good in education.

>

>

> This statement appears correct when on the news

> yesterday they reported that only 11 teachers have

> been sacked for incompetance in the past FORTY

> YEARS. The problems with schools is the teachers

> are not performance managed. And it is the unions

> that have managed to prevent it.

Responding to the first part of course unions are concerned with keeping members in employment but that isn't our only concern, unions also have wider concerns around what is happening in education in general e.g. narrowing of curriculum, teaching to the test etc and often intervene at different levels from national to local to promote more democratic involvement in an educational system that is becoming increasingly centralised and proscribed. It is also important to note that many work related benefits e.g. holidays that are taken for granted by us now, were won for us by trade unions in the past.

As for the Panarama report (tonight 8:30) I am hoping that it will show why so many capability cases are lost by the employer. This is usually through not following procedures correctly and for Performance Management not being carried out properly too.

Anyhow, should there be a need for more debate on this, someone could start a new discussion to which I would happily contribute.

Getting back to academies, what do the people who have posted so far feel about Kingsdale and Charter both becoming academies?

[BB100]

> Anyhow, should there be a need for more debate on

> this, someone could start a new discussion to

> which I would happily contribute.

>

> Getting back to academies, what do the people who

> have posted so far feel about Kingsdale and

> Charter both becoming academies?

The motives of trade unions are very relevant to this debate when a tendancy to protect their members overrides the best interests of children and such concerns are central to a debate on academies when a trade union rep is involved in the discussion. If academies mean Kingsdale can quickly rid of the dead-wood teachers that are failing to teach my child because they are on facebook or their mobile during the lesson, then so be it.