Jump to content

Recommended Posts

James please get your facts right before you post on a public forum.


The current head started in early October, albeit part time initially and a second interim head was appointed to job share for the initial period. Both of them have worked in various schools accross London, employed specifically to go into those schools and raise standards. Therefore I would think they are pretty well qualified to comment on the standards of the school when they first arrive.



How many times have you visited Goodrich and spoken to staff, parents and pupils since October? And how often had you done this prior to the new head starting? If you have visited both before and after then you will surely have been able to see for yourself what a different place Goodrich is now?

If not then let me tell you that there have been incredible changes, all of which have happened since the new head started. Even just the physical appearance of the school is wholly different with new carpets, floors, play and learning equipment, astroturf playground area, benches, plants, work displays etc.

Both of my children have benefited from new learning initiatives which were not in place before and a more focused approach to learning and development. Communication is also vastly improved.


I think we'd all have a lot more respect for southwark council if they just held their hands up and admitted that they failed the school community by not taking any positive aaction to improve the previous regime. Instead you seem to be engaging in petty semantics and distortion of the facts to try and support your lack of action.

I'm afraid your points about the errors in the report that the school didn't spot come accross as a petty attempt to cast the current management in a negative light, without seeming to have any other purpose. You can cast around all you like for reasons not to attribute the great improvements to the new head, but those of us who are part of the school community can all assure you that they are.


As somebody has already said, this is the education and future of our children. I wonder what your feelings would be if it were your children at the school.

I'm delighted the school is on a clear trajectory of improvement and as I said I can now see it reaching even higher Ofsted status than Good.


I have read the Ofsted report in full and would encourage others to also do this. It shows clearly wheere further work is required and the whole school family can help with that endeavour.

James - you express doubt that the new head (and his team) were able to accurately comment on the state of the school after a few months yet you are quite happy to accept the results of a 2 day inspection - funny. Not to mention that you are happy to discount the assessment of those of us with children at the school. It is even clearer to me

now why I simply have no faith in those currently responsible for governing the school and clearly local councillors cannot be relied upon as honest brokers either....

traveller1 Wrote:

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

now why I simply have no faith in those currently

> responsible for governing the school and clearly

> local councillors cannot be relied upon as honest

> brokers either....



You need to be careful T1 with your reference to "governing" the achool. Whilst Southwark and local politicians may have failed the school, the school Governors have done an excellent job and we would not be where we are now without them.

mayo Wrote:

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

> James please get your facts right before you post

> on a public forum.

>



I am in intimately involved with Goodrich school so I do have to remain anonymous here.


I fully agree with the posters here that the new head has replaced an out-of-her depth incompetent predecessor. Be under no illusion, the new leader in the school, has done exactly that: lead. That is why our school has fundamentally changed. Lots of hard work from a whole range of other people, but good leadership has made the difference


As for James Barber: what a joker, he?ll support anything that helps him further his political career. Don?t be fooled by this man. I remember a while back him trying to force through paid parking on Lordship Lane despite something like 80% of people voting against it in a survey. Trying to make out he wanted the best for the area, whilst really pursuing a political objective.

http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,772215,page=47



But, all in all, a fantastic result but not yet finished. Keep watching

This isn't the time or place for Barber bashing, as much as some may enjoy it. Please take it to his own thread. I think he must mis-spoke. It happens, and he's apologised. Move on.


I'm tremendously pleased the school has done so well. I have a close relative working there and they told me how hard the head has been working to ensure they didn't go into special measures, and how seriously he takes his job. It's good to know there are still people of his calibre out there. I hope Goodrich will continue like this for as long as possible.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • In the past such details have always been described as commercially sensitive, which they possibly are. So we've never really known what the deals actually were. And whether they represented value for money for the council, and hence us. 
    • Apologies if this has been asked before. But has the council posted any black and white facts about what income gala brings in and therefore what it funds in the long term?    appreciate it causes a commotion for a few weeks but if it brings in enough revenue to fund the park being a nice place for the rest of the year it feels worth it.   
    • This is a fair point Glemham, although I don't think it is as straightforward as it looks. In essence, the Scheme of Estate Managment 'tithe' goes into maintaining the area, and the costs associated with that, such as planning consents and the like, and as you rightly point out, is ostensibly ring fenced.  However, it seems likely to me that the results of the 'tithe' would impact on the level of commercial rents the Dulwich Estate are able to command, and how much they get when they sell off a piece of land - it is after all a prime area. The 'tithe' is in my view ultimately, even if indirectly, a contributor to the Estate's ability to generate a surplus.  Of that surplus, 85% is directed at the private schools, which seems at odds to me with the spirit of simple instruction of the original Edward Alleyn will to 'educate 12 poor scholars' He didn't suggest they should go to Eton on bursaries. I think the Estate need to be doing far more for local state schools, who are all struggling with estraordinarily tight budgets. I also feel on a personal level uneasy in potentially contributing in any way to an institution such as Dulwich College where the question can be asked - are they struggling to manage successive generational waves of toxicity? The evidence that the Guardian has amassed from the Farage period looks pretty damming to me, and I find the more recent allegations deeply unsettling, although clearly they have been subject to less scrutiny.
    • Thanks Joe. Sorry to the poster of that thread if it was my comment. It was just that none of it made sense to me.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...