Harris Academy (new boys school for East Dulwich)

[benmorg]

I can't see a girls' schools ever getting sucked into the gangland culture of SE London. It's the boys' school that would be a worry.

[lilolil]

BENMORG..............

You and I for head and deputy???? LOL

[Keef]

benmorg Wrote:

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

> I can't see a girls' schools ever getting sucked

> into the gangland culture of SE London. It's the

> boys' school that would be a worry.

I'm not commenting on this school inparticular, but girls are increasingly getting in to gang culture in South London.

[KalamityKel]

Did we all go to wonderful schools then?

[lilolil]

St Trinians..............

[Keef]

What, you mean JAGS? ;-)

Actually, the original St Trinians unifoms (before the films) were based on JAGS uniforms, as the creators daughter went there if I remember rightly.

Aske's for me.

[KalamityKel]

Kingsdale for me - and I survived!!! :))

[Debi]

Kingsdale here too - and we thrived!!!

[dc]

For an independent view the National Audit Office report on Academies is here

They say (amongst a lot of other things in a detailed report):

"It is relatively early days for measuring the performance of academies"

But:

"GCSE performance is improving faster in academies than in other types of school, including those in similar circumstances"

And:

"Taking account of both pupils? personal circumstances and prior attainment, academies? GCSE performance is substantially better, on average, than other schools"

[lilolil]

OK I own up.. I went to Honor Oak Grammar which merged with Friern to become WAVERLEY LOL LOL. Anyone else go to Honor Oak???

[macroban]

Who remembers the Rose Garden?

I bet the boys' school won't have one.

[edgran]

Perhaps before people believe all the criticism of the girls'school they should look at the most recent Ofsted report (November 2007) www.ofsted.gov.uk and check out the reality of the situation - the intake of the school is way below national averages at the moment, but they are providing generally good teaching and a good and realistic curriculum. Also note that behaviour is deemed to be good. Also on the plans for the boys' school only the main building has been outlined - also on the site is/was a dining room (prefab) and a single storey building adjacent to Friern Road and a schoolkeeper's house. When all these are taken into account the actual area of building is not that much more than before. If I was a parent of a boy in East Dulwich now I would be very worried about their secondary education - there definitely seems to be a bit of NYMBYism going on here!

[KalamityKel]

Ofsted aint the holy grail.

Ppl shouldnt necessarily judge a school by grades rather wot the kids actually learn!

[Rolo Tomasi]

William Penn for me and I came out unscathed. Cant say the same for many others though.

[BigDad]

The Harris consultatins are tomorrow and next Wednesday at the girls school.

If you want to go you need to contact Kiran Gondal at [email protected] as it is entrance by invitation only.

The main concern is the size of the building on the site provided - there were major concerns from Southwark that Harris have not bothered to answer:

1. Why does the existing building need to be knocked down?

2. How can 950 boys be accommodated on a site of that size? (previous max was 350 girls I believe)

3. What will be the impact of staggered start/end times and staggered breaks?

4. The design of the school has been slated by the council, by a design review panel, local architects, local groups and local people - it basically sucks! A third of the classes have no external windows, there is a central agora which is a 'waste of space', it will be difficult and expensive to ventilate

5. The mass of the building is up against Friern Rd & lower Upland Rd rather than in its current location

6. The play ground area is minute and has narrow passage ways funneling boys in and out of the school which have caused concerns.

7. The materials used are a strange mixture that do not fit in with the surounding area

8. If Harris can't maintain the swimming pool at the girls site how exactly will they support this as a 'sports' academy?

If you have a boy who will be going into secondary education from 2009 onwards - PLEASE GET INVOLVED!as this is about your only chance to try and get a decent school built on the site!

[ooermrs]

Original Waverley Girl me, way back in the early 80's. It was a really good school then.

I took my daughter to the open day there last month, we were both very impressed and we put it down as one

of her choices.

Ill be interested to see how they turn Waverly Lower school into a Boys school, as its quite a small site.

I think it was only 1st and 2nd years on that site back when I were a lass.

[Clare A]

tomk Wrote:

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

> I teach in an academy at a senior level and have

> visited a number of others in a professional

> capacity. I have also taught at a number of other

> London comps. Trust me, 'academy' is just the new

> word for 'sink school'...... it will already be

> overrun with all the boys from the local estates

> who would otherwise attend Kingsdale and Peckham

> Academy....... Charter, which at my last count was languishing

> somewhere around 30% 5 A*-C grades

Tom, reachers with poor negative defeatist attitudes perhaps similar to your attitude, are just as much to blame often for the failure of the educational system. Aspirational teachers are needed not ones that stereotype everyone from "the local estates".

Kingsdale received an outstanding Ofsted report and is now providing its children with good opportunities; it doesn't need people like you rubbishing it through ignorance and stereotyping.

Charter is also doing very well and your figures are just plain wrong. If you can't get things like this right when you're a teacher, what hope is there for those who are being taught.

[KalamityKel]

well... u know wot they say about those who cant...;-)

Soz tomk I'm not picking on anyone in particular :p

[Frisco]

"Kingsdale received an outstanding Ofsted report and is now providing its children with good opportunities; it doesn't need people like you rubbishing it through ignorance and stereotyping."

Charter is also doing very well and your figures are just plain wrong. If you can't get things like this right when you're a teacher, what hope is there for those who are being taught.

This is my understanding of the situation with these schools too, and I take a particular interest in Kingsdale as I had to forgo the opportunity a few years ago of becoming a governor of that school, due to health problems I was having, but I d maintain an interest in schools and their performance, as a current governor of a school in the north of the borough.

[Caron]

> > "a pack of disruptive, illiterate boys coming from anywhere

> >to spoil our learning atmosphere."

> To be honest I'm not sure I'd want you teaching my son with an

> attitude like that so I feel fortunate that I only have a

> daughter. Oh, and that I don't live in Sutton.

I was harsh when I posted that top comment. DC, you're clearly upset by it and I apologise for that. One thing that I applaud about this thread is the fact that everyone is so passionate and concerned about education. I have taught in two unbelievably difficult, deprived comps; a good, large, country comp and now my current boys' grammar school. I have grave concerns about selective education because of the "failures" who have to find somewhere else to go to school (like indeed I did). It's not ability that's the issue: I am genuinely happy to fulfil my professional obligations to prepare differentiated lessons that cater to all special educational needs, all learning styles, all abilities and all interests. However, what is so, so, so hard is teaching children in classes of 30, when a determined few create disruption and conflict. I give all I've got to help people who want to learn (lunchtime and after-school sessions, see kids individually, provide tailored work for those off ill,etc) - but the one thing I feel a total failure in doing is engaging disaffected - often very able - children. It has made me question the whole notion of compulsory post-11 education. I often felt a total failure at the end of a lesson knowing that the 25 sitting there, waiting, attentive, and trying to learn were being thwarted by my attention being focussed on the 5 who were buggering about. And in case you think I'm a lily-livered weakling who can't control 15-year-olds, I have a reputation for good behavoiur managment. I've taken the easy way out and gone to a school where a desire to learn is a given, but it is not the answer. The majority of the teachers I have met really believe in helping young people and work damn hard to achieve this. When you have prepared a whizzy, interesting, interactive, differentiated lesson in accordance with the syllabus, the QCA, the scheme of work and with Assessment for Learning requirements and the class gets through about 30% of the work because of disruption, it is utterly soul-destroying. I couldn't go back to a school like that, although (thank God) there are lots of teachers who thrive on this kind of challenge.

I put my hands up: I don't know what the answer is. Every Child Matters. I don't have a child of my own, and if I did, I have no idea how I'd educate it round here.

In case anyone's interested and wants to look them up, the schools I have taught in are Hartcliffe School in Bristol, George Ward School in Melksham and The Blandford School in Dorset.

[Caron]

(still on soapbox) the other thing is that I'd say you can't always tell what a school is like by the Ofsted. One school I taught in which got 2's ("good") for everything is one of the most badly-run school's I've come across (it was also a boys' grammar). And my current school which also got 2's for everything is infinitely better in almost every way imho

[dc]

Caron - I wasn't really upset and your further, (perhaps you would agree) more considered, reflections on the pressures that every (particularly) secondary teacher faces in the mainstream are honest and challenging to anyone with a genuine interest in this subject.

I have an enormously high regard for those who teach. I am a governor at a local school and my father was a lecturer at the old North London Poly so I do have some understanding of how committed teachers are to their students - and the difference a good teacher and a good school can make. In fact, what utterly pisses me off is when teachers/social workers etc are scapegoated for problems that are much more complex than the media will allow for - especially when the editorials are written by people who have no experience of the state sector.

My concern is that whilst, locally and nationally, standards are improving and exam results are providing new opportunities for the majority, there is a real issue around the 20%+ of kids falling below the radar who, often through disrupted and disorganised family situations, not only achieve little at school but may also disrupt the learning opportunities of others - and worse. I think that was what I was trying to reflect in my slightly petulant post above. In many schools, I am sure, the balance betweeen effective and highly constrained learning opportunities for the majority of pupils is a pretty fine line. It's easy for some schools, either by price or selection or both, to exclude 'problem' kids but their hopes, fears, aspirations and emotional development have to be effectively addressed or else they and society as a whole will suffer - certainly any society that I want to be proud to be a part of.

Of course it's great that local schools are improving. It's certainly interesting to see the difference in perception of those who have 'heard' this and that about particular schools compared with those of parents whose children actually attend those schools. For my own part, my daughter is at The Charter in year 7 and I simply could not have hoped for a more positive experience than she has enjoyed in her first three months at the school. She has, yes, been tested to check on progress to date but also stretched, cajoled, encouraged, nurtured. Every day she was at primary school she loved. I thought that the transition to secondary was bound to throw up problems and, in truth, I had huge apprehensions, but she is quite simply as happy as she has ever been. I could not ask for more (mind you teenage years beckon....).

I am, incidentally, confident that the new East Dulwich school will provide similar opportunities for boys in the East Dulwich area.

[Caron]

DC - great post and I agree 200%

[dc]

You should be in bed. I hope you're not up marking homework?! :))

[Adam Glasser]

950 pupils? We still need the evidence that this is feasible. Southwark's comprehensive study - Waverley Lower School Site ? Feasibility Study published in 2004 had the following to say about school size:

The Lower School occupies a site area of approximately 1.85 acres.

Based on the recommendations of BB82 (revised), the total site area (including buildings and external areas but excluding playing fields) for the following size of school would be required:

3 Form Entry (450 pupils) ? 1.95 acres

3 form entry with 90 sixth form pupils (540) ? 2.45 acres

4 form entry (600 pupils) ? 2.78 acres

4 form entry with 120 sixth form pupils (720 pupils ) ? 4 acres

Recent reviews of school needs in inner city areas have recognised the difficulties of achieving the minimum site areas recommended in BB82. The exemplar designs should help address this issue. It is nevertheless apparent by the shortfall between the recommended requirements and the site area available that to provide a new secondary school on the existing site will require a high quality, imaginative and sensitive design.

Already by the above standards, the site was too small for the recommended numbers.... !

Personally I would like to see Harris provide us with several other models of schools of this size in this kind of area on this kind of footprint, before they persuade anyone that 950 pupils is feasible. I would also like to hear from someone working in a school of this size on this footprint who says that .. it works!

All this quite apart from the fact that they propose to have the same number of boys on this site ( 1.85 acres) as the upper site - which is 3 times the size. Why should not the boys enjoy equal space to the girls?