Consultation for the Charter School East Dulwich

[savage]

Nodal point remains at Jarvis road, as a significant majority agreed with this as the admission policy on the survey and the board didn't see any reason to change it. They felt that there was no significant difference in need in the surrounding communities.

[James Barber]

Completely understand why they've done this with 64% of respondents supporting this but I fear the lack of any compromise will make obtaining planning permission bumpier. Hope I'm wrong.

[grabot]

James, why do you think that it might impact planning position? Would someone oppose it because there is a possibility that their child might not get in? A "if my child might not get into the new school then no-one should" mentality. If there are enough people in ED with that mindset to have an impact, that is a truly depressing thing.

[DuncanW]

On that point, would people not need to live in the near vicinity to object to the planning approval? And those that do live near the school aren't likely to object on those grounds.

I don't have much planning experience/knowledge, but is that not how it works?

[intexasatthe moment]

Yes ,James please explain .

How can the admissions policy be a planning consideration ?

PS Noticed your wee small hours posts recently ,hope you're ok .

[redjam]

The full 90-page report of the survey findings etc can be found via the Charter website: http://www.charter.southwark.sch.uk/news/?pid=3&nid=6&storyid=168

I have had a skim read and personally am satisfied with the outcome and the process, though no doubt lots of people will still moan (sigh). I too am baffled why James thinks that by going with the majority outcome (and sticking to their original admissions criteria), they will incur planning problems. Surely it would be harder for them to get it through if they changed their original stated criteria and went with a minority opinion?

The one thing that jumped out at me though is that the Harris Federation seem to have decided to take on the role of pantomime baddie, lobbying to have the opening of the school delayed for at least two more years and the number of places available reduced, saying (p.43) 'we will challenge any decisions to proceed with all the means available to us'. I actually have a slight sympathy for Harris because clearly the new school will affect their intake, but this smacks of serious sour grapes. Some of their stated objections are laughable (i.e. it shouldn't open for two years because otherwise it'll have to have a temporary site - er, what about Harris East Dulwich Primary, still waiting for its own permanent site after two years?). I'm really shocked that Harris wants to take up arms against such strong local support (98% of an extraordinary 1173 responses) for the new school to open. I know Lord Harris has a lot of influence with the DfE but I very much hope in this case he has overreached himself.

[BrandNewGuy]

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

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

> Yes ,James please explain .

>

> How can the admissions policy be a planning

> consideration ?

>

> PS Noticed your wee small hours posts recently

> ,hope you're ok .

I think some people's confusion is assuming that taking Jarvis Road as the nodal point means that the school entrance would be there. Which clearly makes no sense as the entrance should be on EDG. Though that in turn makes it imperative that the school is pushed as far as possible to make it the traffic impact as close to zero as possible ? and that includes staff. We already have huge traffic issues at the start and end of the school day, which will only be made worse by the Townley Rd/EDG changes and those suggested for Melbourne Grove.

[DuncanW]

My understanding is the exact parcel of land has yet to be allocated, so they wouldn't be ready to make those decisions as yet.

That said, the vehicular entrance (staff car park?) and the pupil entrance need not be at the same point.

[intexasatthe moment]

"I think some people's confusion is assuming that taking Jarvis Road as the nodal point means that the school entrance would be there"

But Harris ED Girls are having an off site nodal point at j.of Shelbury and Colyton so presumably Charter 2 could have one slightly away from site boundary ?Or does the argument about that nodal point being equi distant between the girls and boys school justify that ? Though I can't see why ,2 different schools ,2 admissions policies .Or does Harris just get what it wants ?

Charter 1 has their admissions criteria measured from an entrance some distance from the

building doesn't it ? I suppose it might be possible to negotiate a footpath from Jessop Rd to school building if the parcel of land doesn't sit near this boundary ?

[intexasatthe moment]

" The one thing that jumped out at me though is that the Harris Federation seem to have decided to take on the role of pantomime baddie, lobbying to have the opening of the school delayed for at least two more years and the number of places available reduced, saying (p.43) 'we will challenge any decisions to proceed with all the means available to us'. I actually have a slight sympathy for Harris because clearly the new school will affect their intake, but this smacks of serious sour grapes. Some of their stated objections are laughable (i.e. it shouldn't open for two years because otherwise it'll have to have a temporary site - er, what about Harris East Dulwich Primary, still waiting for its own permanent site after two years?). I'm really shocked that Harris wants to take up arms against such strong local support (98% of an extraordinary 1173 responses) for the new school to open. I know Lord Harris has a lot of influence with the DfE but I very much hope in this case he has overreached himself ."

Totally gobsmacked at this .

Off to read report .

[bornagain]

redjam Wrote:

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

> The full 90-page report of the survey findings etc

> can be found via the Charter website:

> http://www.charter.southwark.sch.uk/news/?pid=3&ni

> d=6&storyid=168

>

> I have had a skim read and personally am satisfied

> with the outcome and the process, though no doubt

> lots of people will still moan (sigh). I too am

> baffled why James thinks that by going with the

> majority outcome (and sticking to their original

> admissions criteria), they will incur planning

> problems. Surely it would be harder for them to

> get it through if they changed their original

> stated criteria and went with a minority opinion?

>

> The one thing that jumped out at me though is that

> the Harris Federation seem to have decided to take

> on the role of pantomime baddie, lobbying to have

> the opening of the school delayed for at least two

> more years and the number of places available

> reduced, saying (p.43) 'we will challenge any

> decisions to proceed with all the means available

> to us'. I actually have a slight sympathy for

> Harris because clearly the new school will affect

> their intake, but this smacks of serious sour

> grapes. Some of their stated objections are

> laughable (i.e. it shouldn't open for two years

> because otherwise it'll have to have a temporary

> site - er, what about Harris East Dulwich Primary,

> still waiting for its own permanent site after two

> years?). I'm really shocked that Harris wants to

> take up arms against such strong local support

> (98% of an extraordinary 1173 responses) for the

> new school to open. I know Lord Harris has a lot

> of influence with the DfE but I very much hope in

> this case he has overreached himself.

It may be a case of sour grapes but I think that they have a point. There are 3 outstanding/good secondary schools within one mile of the proposed school which are not fully subscribed. From an impartial (and DoE) point of view surely that would raise a few eyebrows as to whether opening a 240 intake school within 2 years is a good use of limited assets. Also they do have a point also that the new Charter for good or bad will affect the Harris intake so being concerned is surely valid.

Sir Dan Moynihan the CE of Harris is a formidable man and is the power behind Lord Harris. He is hugely respected and his views will not be ignored.

[intexasatthe moment]

Oh dear oh dear oh dear .

Guess this is what happens when you do away with LA control of schools ,have no Southwark Admissions Forum ( yes I know ,no longer compulsary ) and have an education system which looks to competition to drive up standards .

Having said that I agree with Harris Fed that Charter 2 could have been more imaginative in their offer of admissions policies .The zoned approach with inner and outer zones ( like but not the same as Bacon and Harris Crystal Palace ) .

So decreasing impact on other close schools and still giving priority to local residents .

Also agree about the seeming curriculum offer being to more academically gifted and low profile of SEN provision .

I have sympathy because The Academy@Peckham is always undersubscribed and Charter 2 seems very popular with those who could apply to Peckham .

But .... I don't buy the implication that Harris weren't aware of the consultation .Despite the omission from the formal consultation of SOME Harris schools it appears others were consulted . Speaks volumes of the lack of community involvement if the local schools all failed to be aware . And why can't Harris now meet with Charter until September unless their main concern is to delay the process and call foul .

And Harris seem to forget that Free Schools are to offer choice ...people want an alternative to the Harris ethos .

Dear dear dear .What a waste of money ,time and energy spent on fighting over who gets the pupils/best pupils . And an argument against this dreadful fragmented ,privatised education system .

[bonaome]

bornagain Wrote:

> It may be a case of sour grapes but I think that

> they have a point. There are 3 outstanding/good

> secondary schools within one mile of the proposed

> school which are not fully subscribed. From an

> impartial (and DoE) point of view surely that

> would raise a few eyebrows as to whether opening a

> 240 intake school within 2 years is a good use of

> limited assets. Also they do have a point also

> that the new Charter for good or bad will affect

> the Harris intake so being concerned is surely

> valid.

>

> Sir Dan Moynihan the CE of Harris is a formidable

> man and is the power behind Lord Harris. He is

> hugely respected and his views will not be

> ignored.

As Harris are paying him over ?300k salary I imagine he'll be wanting to hold on to all the 'business' he can.

But my daughter cannot attend Harris Boys as she's a girl; and in fact we don't want a single sex school anyway, which also means we wouldn't choose Harris Girls - even if we could get in, post lottery. We don't live close enough for her to get into Charter 1. We don't want a faith school (even if we could get into one). She might get into Kingsdale, after all it's a lottery so I suppose she has as good a chance as anyone else.

Have I missed a co-ed, non-faith, non-lottery school, within a mile of Charter2?

I thought the purpose of the consultation was that it would identify the demand by asking parents whether they would put Charter ED as first choice were it available. So that should tell the DoE whether there is enough demand for Charter 2 and what sort of admissions numbers might be appropriate.

As regards Sir Moynihan's letter to Charter, I was astonished to read the part where he says Harris knew nothing about the new school until June, given this whole hoo-har and associated petition, letters from Tessa Jowell etc etc.

He criticises the Charter consultation process. I find that a bit rich given the Harris Nunhead Primary consultation which was just about the worst possible excuse for a consultation I could imagine.

It all feels a bit like the boss has asked to see the figures for the 5 year plan and has just found out there's a whole in his bonus pot.

I do hope his feedback is ignored. That Charter 2 opens next year with as large an intake as can meet local demand and that the very many parents in the surrounding area who want a non-faith, co-ed, good school for their kids get the 'parental choice' all of this was meant to promise.

[redjam]

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

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

>

> But .... I don't buy the implication that Harris

> weren't aware of the consultation .Despite the

> omission from the formal consultation of SOME

> Harris schools it appears others were consulted .

> Speaks volumes of the lack of community

> involvement if the local schools all failed to be

> aware . And why can't Harris now meet with Charter

> until September unless their main concern is to

> delay the process and call foul .

>

> And Harris seem to forget that Free Schools are to

> offer choice ...people want an alternative to the

> Harris ethos .

>

> Dear dear dear .What a waste of money ,time and

> energy spent on fighting over who gets the

> pupils/best pupils . And an argument against this

> dreadful fragmented ,privatised education system .

Agree with all this. And yes, I don't buy that Harris didn't know about it - from what I can gather, Charter contacted Harris Girls and Harris Boys but screwed up by omitting to separately contact the Harris Federation plus three other Harris schools including the one in Peckham. But surely if Harris Girls and Harris Boys were both contacted, you'd have thought the Federation would be aware of the consultation - do they not speak to each other? And how could they NOT know when it's been such a big thing locally?

I'm so dismayed about this. The point is that many people don't want what Harris are offering locally for whatever reason (whether because it's single sex, or because they don't like Harris itself, or because they don't like the slightly sausage-factory feel of the schools - not saying they are, just my impression of people's objections). Charter is offering something that the local community overwhelmingly wants, and planning to cater for the projected shortfall of places once the bulge years hit, starting next year. Do Harris really have the power to scupper the 2016 opening at this stage?

ETA: Cross-posted with Bonaome - agree with you about lack of co-ed schools round here. And yes, I did laugh at the bit where they criticised the Charter consultation in the light of their embarrassingly bad consultation for the ED primary school...

[bonaome]

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

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

> Also agree about the seeming curriculum offer

> being to more academically gifted and low profile

> of SEN provision .

>

I agree with all you say except this bit about Charter setting out to attract more academically gifted kids. SEN/EHCplan provision requirements (where the school is named) always has precedence over oversubscription criteria. The rest is the great unwashed based on living nearest the school.

I don't see how that would lead to the school targeting the more academically gifted.

[grabot]

Assuming that Harris intend to pursue this. Is it really wise to pursue such a disingenuous path, against the stated aims of the community, when Harris's fear is that the local community will become less interested in their schools?

[bornagain]

bonaome Wrote:

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

> Have I missed a co-ed, non-faith, non-lottery

> school, within a mile of Charter2?

>

Yes, Harris Peckham and it is under-subsribed.

[intexasatthe moment]

bonaome - I think that giving siblings priority over those with special medical and social needs it sends the wrong message .

And I just think ( probably oversensitive ) that sentences like these

" Attention will be given to those pupils who learn most quickly as well as the more able linguists who will also be able to study Mandarin. Talented musicians will be able to apply for a scholarship to support tuition in vocal/instrumental teaching "

seem to outshine these

"Those pupils whose abilities develop at a later stage will also be given appropriate attention. If for any

reason a pupil arrives at our school without essential literacy or numeracy skills, we will

support them with an entry-year nurture group, rapidly bringing those pupils to the standard

expected to access the rest of the curriculum. Tailored support will also be available for

students whose first language is not English. "

but I think I'm being over sensitive .

[intexasatthe moment]

"Have I missed a co-ed, non-faith, non-lottery school, within a mile of Charter2? "

Academy @Peckham ? One and a half miles ,but closer than Kingsdale .

[intexasatthe moment]

" Do Harris really have the power to scupper the 2016 opening at this stage? " - I hope not but feel sure that their influence will be felt .

My guess would be by reducing the planned admissions number and altering the admissions policy . With that going on they won't need to target delaying the opening date .

The letter from the federation is loaded with threats - that the consultation wasn't correctly carried out and that this leaves the process " open to challenge " ,that they'll question the DfE's equalities impact assessment if they don't agree with it ,and that nasty clincher ,already quoted by redjam

.

'we will challenge any decisions to proceed with all the means available to us'

Not ameliorated by the qualifying " if we feel our schools and vulnerable young people they serve are damaged by this proposal " which they clearly think they are .So change the proposal or we'll fight .

And what does this

"Having been involved in opening Free Schools we can make some higher level comments about the process and validity of what you are doing ;and what ministers are in danger of doing without adequate thought ."

mean ? We have the ear of policy makers and can ensure that they make the "right" decision by giving them food for thought ?

[Qwe]

The subtext is, possibly, that they will seek a Judicial Review of the decision if their concerns are not addressed.

[HannahSE23]

bornagain Wrote:

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

> bonaome Wrote:

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

> -----

>

> > Have I missed a co-ed, non-faith, non-lottery

> > school, within a mile of Charter2?

> >

>

> Yes, Harris Peckham and it is under-subsribed.

So don't tell me that all the people who campaigned like crazy for the Charter 2 nodal point to remain in Jarvis Road as that position better serves Camberwell/Peckham actually already have a viable co-ed, non-faith, non-lottery school already on their doorstep??? What was all the fuss about then?

[bornagain]

hoonaloona Wrote:

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

> So don't tell me that all the people who

> campaigned like crazy for the Charter 2 nodal

> point to remain in Jarvis Road as that position

> better serves Camberwell/Peckham actually already

> have a viable co-ed, non-faith, non-lottery school

> already on their doorstep??? What was all the fuss

> about then?

I suspect that the fuss has been created by the fact that those supporting Charter 2 do not want to send their children to Harris Peckham.

[bonaome]

bornagain Wrote:

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

> bonaome Wrote:

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

> -----

>

> > Have I missed a co-ed, non-faith, non-lottery

> > school, within a mile of Charter2?

> >

>

> Yes, Harris Peckham and it is under-subsribed.

It's oversubscribed according to

this booklet on secondary admissions from Southwark. It's also more than a mile from Charter 2. And moreover, it looks like we would be very unlikely to get her in there based on a distance offer.

[bonaome]

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

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

> bonaome - I think that giving siblings priority

> over those with special medical and social needs

> it sends the wrong message .

Surely either a child has a SEN/EHC plan, in which case they get priority, or they do not have an EHC plan and they are the same as everyone else. Right? Wrong?

What are the special medical and social needs that would be missed because they are not picked up in the EHC assessment?

Genuine question - not trying to wind anyone up.