Writing your consultation report: practical guidance
The purpose of a consultation report is to show how you actively engaged with relevant groups and stakeholders in your local community, what feedback they provided on your proposal to establish a Free School, and how you intend to respond to their feedback.
A typically good consultation report would normally include:
1. An executive summary highlighting the main findings of your consultation · Provide a brief, high-level summary of responses to your consultation questionnaire and any other feedback (e.g. letters, emails, meetings), outlining the main positive and negative points that emerged. 2. An outline and timeline of the consultation process · Indicate how long the consultation process ran for and provide exact dates for when different types of consultations (questionnaires, meetings) were carried out; · Describe how you disseminated your consultation materials (questionnaires, leaflets, letters inviting responses, etc.). Include extracts in the main report and enclose full copies as appendices; · Describe any consultation events (public meetings, workshops, etc.) you held. Clearly indicate the nature of the events, where they took place, who attended, and what was discussed; · Briefly list the respondents and stakeholders (e.g. local schools, Local Authorities, parents, community groups and leaders, local residents, prospective students) who took part in your consultation process. As an appendix to your report, provide a complete list of the institutions, groups, and types of individuals (within the limits of confidentiality) you consulted; · Briefly describe how you envisage the consultation to progress after the publication of your first report. 3. A summary of responses to your consultation questionnaires · Specify how many people responded in a certain way to a particular question. Express the responses they gave as percentages of the total number of respondents for that particular question; · Use tables, bar graphs, and pie charts to illustrate responses, particularly for crucial questions such as whether your respondents support your proposal to establish a Free School; · If respondents added comments (positive or negative), include direct quotes, but ensure confidentiality by anonymising them; · For each question, indicate what steps you will take to respond to the feedback. 4. A summary of the main points made by respondents who sent in letters or emails. Use anonymised quotes and indicate how you will respond to the feedback. 5. A summary of the key questions raised by participants at your consultation events, indicating how you responded to them. You could also include a transcript of these sessions as an appendix. 6. A clear conclusion, giving a brief, high-level summary of what steps you will take to respond to the feedback you received.
Below are three exemplar reports, kindly provided by:
1. Oakbank (a Mainstream Free School due to open in Wokingham in 2012);
2. Sandymoor School (a Mainstream Free School due to open in Halton in 2012);
3. Wapping High School (a Mainstream Free School due to open in Tower Hamlets in 2012, report co-authored by Kerstyn Comley and Jake Kemp).
Consultation Feedback Report (Phase 1)
January 2012
Contents
Section Title Page Section 1 Executive summary 3 Section 2 Introduction and background 5 Section 3 Consultation process 6 Section 4 Questionnaire responses summary 7 Section 5 Other consultation feedback 27 Section 6 Questions and answers for key issues raised 28 during the consultation process Section 7 Conclusion and Next Steps 31
Appendix A Consultation stakeholder list 32 Appendix B Proposed revised admission procedures for 35 Oakbank Appendix C Revised admissions segment map 40
Section 1: Executive summary
The proposal is to open a new secondary free school in the west of the Wokingham Borough in September 2012. The school, which will be known as Oakbank, will initially be a four form entry 11–16 school1. The free school is sponsored by CfBT Schools Trust (CST), working in partnership with the West of Wokingham Parent Group (WoWPG). The school plans to open with its first cohort of Year 7 pupils in September 2012 and grow organically year on year until all year groups are in place in 2016/18.
The free school consultation process, conducted by CfBT Schools Trust and covered by this report, ran from 6 December 2011 to 16 January 2012. The objective was to inform and gather views from key stakeholders, particularly parents of potential pupils, local community members and local education providers regarding the Sponsor’s proposal for the new free school. Electronic and hard copy information leaflets about the consultation process were circulated to as many stakeholders as possible and all were encouraged to respond by paper or via the school’s website: www.oakbankschool.org.uk. Appendix A contains a list of the stakeholders who received copies of the consultation leaflet. Public notices announcing CST’s intention to undertake a consultation exercise between these dates were also published in the Reading Evening Post and Wokingham Times during the week beginning 6 December 2011.
The purpose of this report is to present the key messages received by CST during the consultation process, including the main views gathered from questionnaire and other responses received.
Questionnaire responses In total 1,200 consultation leaflets were distributed. In total 108 questionnaire responses were returned to CST, indicating that the majority of stakeholders reached did not respond. Of the responses returned, 68.2% were from parents/carers of primary-aged children and 51.4% were from local residents. 95.5% of the respondents to the questionnaire were in favour or very much in favour of the arrangements for the proposed free school. 91.1% of the respondents to the questionnaire were in agreement or very much in agreement with the proposal to limit the size of the school. 95.8% of the respondents supported or very much supported the proposed academic focus of the curriculum, although a number of respondents also commented on the need to ensure a broad and balanced curriculum was provided at the school and that children of all abilities were appropriately catered for.
Main positive points raised during consultation
Overall we received overwhelming support for the opening of Oakbank School. The respondents who varied from prospective parents, local residents and community members to local authorities and neighbouring secondary schools had many positive things to say about the plans we have for the school.
A majority were happy with the proposed size of the school and the positive effect this could have on pupils’ performance. We received positive feedback regarding the location of the school, as a majority are supportive of the Ryeish Green site being reused and the consensus is that a new school is very much needed within the area.
1 Subject to approval of the Secretary of State for Education, Oakbank aims to open a sixth form by September 2017.
Most respondents feel it would be a positive boost to the area and the community. We received a letter from the Right Honourable John Redwood (local MP) which stated:
‘I have no comments other than to endorse strongly the admissions and catchment proposals currently being put forward. I am pleased to see that these do seem to take into account the needs of my constituents.’
Main negative points raised during consultation
The majority of the negative points raised during the consultation related to the proposed admissions criteria for the school. Many respondents were concerned by the proposed allocation of places by segments and who should be given greater priority in terms of access to the school.
There were also some issues regarding the overall lack of clarity of the curriculum to be offered to pupils, particularly those who might find the proposed academic curriculum hard to access. We received the following comments:
‘We would like to understand to what extent the curriculum will accommodate the spiritual development of the pupils’
‘Whilst I support an academic focus, it is important to recognise that in a mixed ability/non selective environment, some children may struggle and will need dedicated extra support’
‘Disadvantages those for whom the school was initially intended’
Section 2: Introduction and background
An application to the Department for Education to open a new secondary free school in the west of the Wokingham borough was approved by the Secretary of State for Education in the autumn of 2011.
The free school, which will be known as Oakbank, will be non-faith, inclusive and based at the heart of its local community. Families living in the west of the Wokingham borough currently do not have access to a local secondary school; children face the prospect of long journey times. They are also split up from their school friends when they leave their primary schools at the end of Year 6 to travel to a number of different secondary schools within West Berkshire, Hampshire, Reading and the Wokingham Borough. The opening of Oakbank is intended to address both these issues, as well as creating a community hub for everyone living in the area something which is also missing at present.
The school will open to its first cohort of 84 Year 7 pupils in September 2012 (and possibly a smaller cohort of Years 8 and 9 pupils) and will grow to become a full school of between 550 and 750 pupils over five to seven years. The school has currently been approved as an 11– 16 school; however, subject to approval by the Secretary of State for Education, we plan to expand provision up to age 18 by 2017 at the latest.
The school has been proposed by CfBT Schools Trust, a Reading-based international not- for-profit education specialist, in partnership with the West of Wokingham Parent Group, an organisation of local parents and community representatives.
Section 3: Consultation process
In October 2011 the Secretary of State for Education approved an application from CfBT Schools Trust (CST), in partnership with the West of Wokingham Parent Group (WoWPG), to open a new secondary free school to the west of Wokingham.
As part of the post-approval process all free schools are required to undertake a public consultation exercise which assesses the level of support for the free school proposal and its proposed framework of operation this includes: pupil numbers; admission arrangements; and curriculum and must be completed before it enters into a Funding Agreement2 with the Secretary of State which allows it formally to open.
The Oakbank free school consultation exercise undertaken by CST and covered by this report ran from 6 December 2011 to 16 January 2012.
Public notices announcing CST’s intention to undertake a consultation exercise between these dates were also published in the Reading Evening Post and Wokingham Times during the week beginning 6 December 2011.
1,200 copies of the consultation leaflet were distributed to target stakeholder groups. Electronic copies of the leaflet were also widely circulated. Appendix A contains a list of the stakeholders who received copies of the consultation leaflet. As this is a new school we were unable to consult with any existing staff or pupils.
This consultation exercise formed Phase 1 of a two-stage consultation process. The second stage, which includes the publication and distribution of this report, runs from 25 January to 8 February. It will ask, based on the outcomes of the first consultation process and CST’s responses to the issues raised, whether or not CST should enter into a Funding Agreement with the Secretary of State to open Oakbank in September 2012.
Everyone who returned a consultation response, as well as everyone on our Oakbank mailing list, will receive a copy of the consultation feedback report and will be invited to complete and submit a response to our Phase 2 consultation questionnaire, which will ask:
Having seen a copy of the Oakbank Consultation Feedback Report, and our proposed solutions to the issues raised, do you believe CfBT Schools Trust should:
enter into a Funding Agreement* with the Secretary of State for Education to open Oakbank Free School in September 2012; not enter into a Funding Agreement* with the Secretary of State for Education to open Oakbank Free School in September 2012?
The results of this second consultation exercise, together with the results of the first exercise, will be shared with the Department for Education (DfE) who will advise the Secretary of State as to whether or not he should enter into a Funding Agreement with CST with respect of Oakbank Free School.
2 A Funding Agreement provides the framework within which Free Schools will operate i.e. those issues we have been consulting with you on including: pupil numbers, admission arrangements, and curriculum provision. A Funding Agreement must be signed before a free school can open.
Section 4: Questionnaire response summary
This section of the report summarises the responses received to the consultation questionnaire. The questionnaire provided respondents with the opportunity to comment on specific questions as well as allowing for general comments. CfBT Schools Trust and the west of Wokingham parent group’s responses to comments and/or questions raised have been addressed as far as possible in Section 6 of this report.
Due to rounding of numbers to one decimal point and some respondents selecting more than one response to some questions, the total percentages for each question do not always equal 100%. Due to some questionnaires not being fully completed by respondents, and others submitting written responses to certain questions only, the number of total responses to each question may vary.
In total 108 questionnaires and nine other written responses were returned to CfBT Schools Trust. Of the questionnaire responses returned, 68.2% were from parents/carers of primary- aged children and 51.4% were from local residents.
Questions 1 and 2 asked for background information / contact details of each respondent.
Out of the 108 respondents, 86 completed this section. Of these: 73 (68.2%) of the respondents who completed our survey were a parent/carer of a pupil at a Primary School; 4 (3.7%) of the respondents who completed our survey were a parent/carer of a pupil at a Secondary School; 3 (2.8%) of the respondents who completed our survey were governors at a Primary School; 2 (1.9%) of the respondents who completed our survey were governors at a Secondary school; 10 (9.3%) of the respondents who completed our survey were a member of staff at a Primary School; 5 (4.7%) of the respondents who completed our survey were a member of staff at a Secondary School; 55 (51.4%) of the respondents who completed our survey were local residents; 3 (2.8%) of the respondents who completed our survey were local councillors; 7 (6.5%) of the respondents who completed our survey were other interested parties.
Question 3 asked to what extent respondents supported the proposed vision for the Free School – which was stated as:
Oakbank aims to be an outstanding and happy school where all children are empowered, through knowledge and self-confidence, to take responsibility for themselves and their community.
A total of 99 people responded to this question; of these 98% were supportive or very supportive of the proposed vision for Oakbank.
Summary of Responses
90 (90.9%) of the respondents said they very much support the vision 7 (7.1%) of the respondents said they support it to some extent 2 (2%) of the respondents said they do not support the vision very much 0 (0%) of the respondents said not at all. 0 (0%) of respondents said they don’t know
13 respondents chose to include additional comments why they supported the proposed vision. Comments made included:
‘There is a genuine need for high quality secondary education provision in the area.’ ‘It will help create a sense of community in the local area.’ ‘The school is exactly what the area and my child need.’
Only one of the two respondents who did not support the vision made a comment as follows:
‘The aspirations of the school are laudable but being an outstanding school is awarded from hard work and results not aspirations.’
What we will do as a result of this feedback
On the basis of this feedback, there is evidence of strong support from the majority of stakeholders for the school’s proposed vision. The school’s Shadow Governing Body (CST and WoWPG) will therefore continue to work closely with our newly appointed Principal Designate and other members of staff as they come on board, to ensure we are able to deliver this vision for the school.
We will continue to communicate progress in all areas of development to prospective parents and other interested stakeholders via our website and monthly e-newsletter.
We will also be holding a series of further information/open days to update everyone on the progress being made towards our opening of the school in September. The first of these will be held in early March 2012.
Question 4 asked respondents to indicate how important they felt the proposed features of the school would be in terms of its achieving its vision.
A total of 94 people responded to this question. They ranked the proposed features in the following order of importance:
1. Employing a highly skilled and motivated team of teaching and non-teaching staff who share the school’s vision and are committed to achieving high aspirations for all students; 100% of respondents ranked these features as important or very important; 2. Having consistent expectations of behaviour and dress such that students take pride in themselves and their school, and are known locally for their courtesy and manners; 99% of respondents ranked these features as important or very important. 3. Encouraging and supporting all children to achieve the English Baccalaureate (GCSE at grade C or above in English, mathematics, a modern foreign language, at least two science subjects and a humanities subject) and as a minimum expecting all students to achieve a grade C in English and mathematics at GCSE; 94.7% of respondents ranked these features as important or very important; 4. Using robust student data to drive continuous improvement and publishing an annual impact report; 92.5% of respondents ranked these features as important or very important; 5. Coming together as a school, house or key stage once a week to build and continually reinforce the sense of shared endeavour and success; 91.3% of respondents ranked these features as important or very important; 6. Being a nurturing, community school with a cross key stage buddying programme, strong and competitive house system and mixed ability tutor groups; 90.2% of respondents ranked these features as important or very important; 7. Employing a Community Liaison Officer to build relationships with parents and carers, local employers and groups, and to arrange character, community and aspiration- building trips targeted at each student’s particular strengths and needs; 82.8% of respondents ranked these features as important or very important.
Summary of Responses
Summary of each question and score allocated
1. Encouraging and supporting all children to achieve the English Baccalaureate, and as a minimum expecting all students to achieve a grade C in English and mathematics at GCSE 1 – Very Important 2 3 4 5 – Unimportant 74 15 3 2 0 78.7% 16% 3.2% 2.1% 0%
2. Employing a highly skilled and motivated team of teaching and non-teaching staff who share the school’s vision and are committed to achieving high aspirations for all students 1 – Very Important 2 3 4 5 – Unimportant 90 3 0 0 0 96.8% 3.2% 0% 0% 0% 3. Using robust student data to drive continuous improvement; and publishing an annual impact report 1 – Very Important 2 3 4 5 – Unimportant 52 34 6 1 0 55.9% 36.6% 6.5% 1.1% 0%
4. Having consistent expectations of behaviour and dress such that students take pride in themselves and their school, and are known locally for their courtesy and manners 1 – Very Important 2 3 4 5 – Unimportant 78 15 1 0 0 83% 16% 1.1% 0% 0%
5. Being a nurturing, community school with a cross key stage buddying programme, strong and competitive house system and mixed ability tutor groups 1 – Very Important 2 3 4 5 – Unimportant 66 17 9 0 0 71.7% 18.5% 9.8% 0% 0%
6. Employing a Community Liaison Officer to build relationships with parents and carers, local employers and groups, and to arrange character, community and aspiration-building trips targeted at each student’s particular strengths and needs 1 – Very Important 2 3 4 5 – Unimportant 50 27 14 2 0 53.8% 29% 15.1% 2.2% 0%
7. Coming together as a school, house or key stage once a week to build and continually reinforce the sense of shared endeavour and success 1 – Very Important 2 3 4 5 – Unimportant 54 30 8 0 0 58.7% 32.6% 8.7% 0% 0%
A number of respondents took the opportunity to highlight in the comments section what school characteristics were important to them; some examples are shown below:
‘I would like all Oakbank pupils to be actively encouraged to have a positive attitude towards learning and enjoy attending school. I would like this school to be a strong community hub. I would also like each child to be stretched to reach his or her full potential, whatever that level is.’ ‘Building a school that exceeds the expectations of parents is a key element to people wishing to live in Shinfield and the surrounding area.’ ‘Preparing school leavers to cope with adult life in terms of further education and/or training and employment, financial literacy and civic awareness.’ ‘Frequent opportunities for parents to receive feedback or discuss the progress of their child.’
What we will do as a result of this feedback
These results demonstrate strong support for our proposed approach to achieving our vision for the school and its pupils.
We have appointed the school Principal, who has been working with the school’s Shadow Governing Body since the start of January on a consultancy basis and will be taking up his appointment full time from the beginning of June. Other senior roles have recently been advertised and we hope to have all teaching staff appointed by Easter 2012. Staff will all be expected to attend a series of visits to the school before it opens and participate in a two-day induction workshop to ensure they are committed to, and able to deliver on, the school’s vision.
All pupils joining Oakbank will be expected to sign a pupil-school promise, as will their parents. These promises clearly set out the school’s expectations of their behaviour and how any unacceptable behaviour will be dealt with. The school’s ethos puts a strong emphasis on the role of the Form Tutor and the house system to ensure clear expectations for pupil behaviour are set and managed. All tutors will receive training as required in effective behaviour management.
The Principal is currently working on the school’s curriculum plan to ensure we have the best staff team in place to deliver the planned curriculum. Not just delivering high standards in English, mathematics and science, but also in wider aspects of the curriculum, for example the Arts, Sports and Technology.
Question 5 asked respondents to what extent they supported the proposed academic focus of the school’s curriculum.
A total of 96 people responded to this question. Of these only 4 (4.2%) said they did not support or were not sure whether or not they supported the proposed academic focus of the school’s curriculum.
Summary of Responses
68 (70.8%) of the respondents said they very much supported the academic focus of the school’s curriculum 24 (25%) of the respondents said they supported the academic focus of the school’s curriculum to some extent 2 (2.1%) of the respondents said they did not really support the academic focus of the school’s curriculum None (0%) of the respondents said Not at all 2 (2.1%) of the respondents said they didn’t know if they supported the academic focus of the school’s curriculum.
19 of the respondents to this question chose to make additional comments why they did or did not support the proposed academic focus of the school. Ten of these comments were made by respondents who were supportive of the proposal and included comments such as:
‘Starting with getting the basics spot on is vital.’ ‘with a good foundation in the core subjects other learning is made easier.’
Other comments were made by respondents who were not supportive of the proposal and included comments such as:
‘The curriculum, as outlined, appears very prescriptive and rather limited compared to that available in neighbouring schools. Not to have a vocational pathway seems strangely at odds with the notion of an inclusive community school.’
‘The focus on such high academic achievement is at odds with the vision of a good education for all in the west of Wokingham area. Those parents with such high academic aspirations will be looking, in the first place, towards the grammar schools.’
A further five respondents who were generally supportive of the proposal said they would welcome further clarification with regard to the curriculum to be delivered at the school.
What will we do as a result of this feedback
We will work with our principal designate on the detailed planning of the curriculum taking into account the specific feedback about the need to offer a broad and balanced curriculum to all pupils, in particular to ensure the curriculum is accessible and appropriate for those for whom a purely academic curriculum may not be suited. This will include the provision of subjects covering the arts, technology and sports which will be available to all pupils.
We have also revised the proposed timetable to give more time to Science and Modern Foreign Languages (MfL) and slightly less to English and Mathematics. We have also decided all pupils will have the same allocation of subject lessons.
Question 6 asked respondents how in favour they were of the proposal to use the former Ryeish Green school site for the new Oakbank Free School.
A total of 96 respondents answered this question. Of these 93.8% said they were in favour or very much in favour of this location for the new school.
Summary of Responses
76 (79.2%) of the respondents said they are very much in favour of this location 14 (14.6%) of the respondents said they are in favour to some extent 3 (3.1%) of the respondents said they are not really in favour of this location 2 (2.1%) of the respondents said they are not at all in favour of this location 1 (1%) of the respondents said they do not know if they are in favour.
29 respondents chose to make additional comments with regard to why they did or did not support the proposed location.
21 of the comments were made by those who supported the proposed location and included statements such as:
‘This would be a perfect site. A large number of children would be able to walk or cycle to school. There are already a good number of established school buildings which could be made good use of and would cost a lot less than building a brand new school.’ ‘From a catchment perspective it is ideal and very much needed. Less open-minded people will of course still refer to it as “the new Ryeish Green” but if all that is proposed is upheld at Oakbank, this hopefully should quickly be diminished.’ ‘It’s at the heart of the community, is easily accessible and sustainable as the buildings already exist. With the proposed development south of the M4 there is a great opportunity to increase catchment and obtain additional funding via the Section 106 contribution from the developers.’
Eight of the comments were made by people who were less supportive of the proposed site. These comments included statements such as:
‘The site is aged and in poor condition. The Strategic Plan for Wokingham clearly identifies the need to build a new secondary school for the Borough – rather than occupy a site associated with a school that was shunned by the local populace and is in out of date accommodation.’
What we will do as a result of this feedback
On the basis of these results we believe that the majority of stakeholder’s feel, as we do, that the former Ryeish Green school site is the best location for the new secondary free school. It provides the best value-for-money solution for the Government as well as creating a community facility that is currently missing in the local area.
The school’s Shadow Governing Body and the Principal are working closely with Partnerships for Schools (PfS) to negotiate the lease of the school site from Wokingham Borough Council. In the meantime a number of site visits have already taken place with the PfS Technical Adviser team, which includes an architect who is starting to draw up some plans for the site. PfS will help us ensure we make the most effective use of the current facilities and can create a high quality teaching and learning environment for the new school population.
We acknowledge that opening the school on the site of a former school creates some potential image problems but we are very clear that this is a new school with a new vision, ethos, curriculum and student group. We are determined to work closely with pupils, parents, the local community and staff to ensure that Oakbank’s reputation is exemplary and the school becomes the number one choice of secondary education for local parents.
Question 7 asked how in favour respondents were of each of the proposed, non-statutory, admissions criteria.
A total of 90 respondents answered one or more parts of this question. The proposal to accept siblings as a priority received almost universal support 97.8% (88 responses) and 68 (75.6%) respondents supported giving founders’ children priority.
Summary of Responses
1. (From 2013) Children with a brother or sister who will be attending the school at the time of proposed admission. The children concerned must be living at the same address. Very much To some extent Not very much Not at all Don’t know 77 11 1 0 1 85.6% 12.2% 1.1% 0% 1%
2. Children of founders of the school (this criterion is still subject to approval by the Secretary of State for Education) Very much To some extent Not very much Not at all Don’t know 33 35 9 11 2 36.7% 38.9% 10% 12.2% 2.2%
3. Children living nearest to the school measured in a straight line from the child’s home to the main entrance of the school (travel by private car or public transport is not taken into account) in line with proportion drawn from three segments: 1) Shinfield segment (30% of total places), 2) Grazeley and Three Mile Cross segment (30% of total places), 3) Spencers Wood and Swallowfield segment (40% of total places). Please see map in Appendix C
Very much To some extent Not very much Not at all Don’t know 56 20 8 4 1 62.9% 22.5% 9% 4.5% 1.1%
22 respondents chose to made additional comments in relation to this question.
Comments generally related to the following themes:
Catchment area Overall feelings were very mixed as to where the school should draw its pupils from, with one group of respondents’ arguing strongly that the school should offer the majority of its places to children living in the villages in the west of the Wokingham borough and revert to the original proposal to specific attendance at one of the five local feeder schools within the subscription criteria; and with another smaller group arguing that the school should cater more directly for children living to the north of the borough, in particular those living in Lower Earley who also have difficulty accessing a local secondary school.
We were advised by the Department for Education (DfE) that it was not lawful within the terms of the Schools Admissions Code to name the five village feeder schools, and that our admissions area should cover communities to the north of the M4 for whom Oakbank would be their nearest school. However, we were also strongly against the introduction of a simple distance-from-school criteria as the basis of place allocation as this criteria does not work well in rural settings and would fail to address the primary reason behind applying to open this school – namely to provide a viable, local secondary option for those families living in the west of the Wokingham borough.
As a result of these two factors and in consultation with the DfE, we developed the proposed to develop a segment solution to the allocation of pupil places.
Segment boundaries and pupil allocations As with the issue above, comments tended to be polarised, with one group of respondents arguing for a greater allocation of places to the Shinfield/South Reading/Lower Earley segment and others for more places to the Spencers Wood/Swallowfield segment. Unfortunately, given the need for secondary school places in the local area, Oakbank will not be able to accommodate all local pupils but believes the current admissions proposal allows for access for the widest group of children possible, given its proposed size and location.
The number of places allocated to each segment will be reviewed by the school’s Governing Body year on year and adjustments made as required. The large-scale housing developments planned for Shinfield, Three Mile Cross and Spencers Wood will impact significantly on the school in the future, as will Wokingham Borough Council’s plans to relocate Emmbrook School to the Arborfield Garrison site and to create additional pupil places linked to the housing developments on that site.
Founders’ children A large number of respondents felt that given the time and commitment the founders have contributed to the creation of the school, the criteria to allow founder’s children priority was reasonable. A small number felt very strongly that founders should not receive priority when accessing places at the school over other local families. As stated on the consultation leaflet this oversubscription criterion is still subject to the approval of the Secretary of State for Education at both a national and Oakbank level and will only be applied if approval is granted. If enforced, the criterion will only apply to five families and a maximum of six pupils over a period of two years. We would be happy to supply details of those founders affected by such a clause if approved.
What we will do as a result of this feedback
On the basis of these results we seek approval from the Secretary of State for the proposed admission arrangements. However, in response to some comments received we have sought to provide greater clarity regarding where the segment boundaries fall and have proposed that we follow, where possible, major roadways to define the segments. Please see Appendix C for more details of the new proposed segment boundaries. We have also added an outer limit to the segments at a radial distance of four miles from the school.
We will, depending on the outcomes of the Secretary of State for Education’s decision regarding founders’ children, confirm or amend our proposed oversubscription criterion.
We have sought to provide further clarification of some of the terminology used in our Admissions Document, e.g. ‘siblings’ and the process we would apply if one or more segment was under-subscribed or a tie-break arose between the application of two pupils equally weighted under our oversubscription criteria. See Appendix B for further details.
Question 8 asked respondents to what extent they agreed with the proposal to admit 84 pupils to Year 7 in 2012 and in 112 pupils in subsequent years.
A total of 88 people answered this question. Of these 86.3% agreed to some extent or were very supportive of the proposal.
Summary of Responses
53 (60.2%) of the respondents very much agreed with the admission numbers plan 23 (26.1%) of the respondents agreed to some extent with the admission numbers plan 2 (2.3%) of the respondents did not really agree with the admission numbers plan 3 (3.4%) of the respondents didn’t agree at all with the admission numbers plan 7 (8%) of the respondents didn’t know if they agreed with the admission numbers plan
16 respondents chose to make a comment in support of their response to this question. Nine of the comments received were made by those supportive of the proposed admission numbers and included statements such as:
‘I would be greatly discouraged if it were to be any more, as even a school with the best of intentions (such as Oakbank) faces difficulties in maintaining such standards when there are ever growing pupil attendance.’ ‘I think a smaller school is much better for the local community.’
A further seven comments were received from respondents who did not agree with the proposed pupil numbers and included statements such as:
‘In my view at three forms of entry the school will struggle to provide a high quality, well- rounded education, support and opportunities. Attracting and retaining quality teachers will be a challenge.’ ‘This number may be too low with all of the planned development and the existing growth in numbers of children.’
What we will do as a result of this feedback
On the basis of this feedback we will offer 84 Year 7 places to our first cohort of pupils who will start at the school in September 2012, and increase this offer to 112 in 2013.
We will work with the new Principal Designate to ensure we can attract the highest-calibre staff to the school by promoting the merits of working in a small school, and ensure that as a team they have the skills and attributes required to deliver our planned curriculum and wider school vision. We will work with prospective parents to ensure they fully understand what Oakbank is offering them and their child(ren) and be clear about the benefits and disadvantages of selecting a smaller school. We will work closely with the local community to ensure the support they have offered the school enables us to provide a rich and varied educational experience for all pupils.
Question 9 asked respondents to what extent they supported the proposal to limit pupil numbers to 112 (4 forms of entry) per year group from 2013 to ensure it can deliver on its vision of being a small, nurturing community school.
A total of 90 respondents answered this question; of these only 8 (8.8%) did not agree with the proposal.
Summary of Responses
62 (68.9%) of the respondents very much agreed with the limit of 112 per year group. 20 (22.2%) of the respondents agreed to some extent with the limit of 112 per year group. 2 (2.2%) of the respondents do not really agree very much with the limit of 112 per year group. 2 (2.2%) of the respondents do not agree at all with the limit of 112 per year group. 4 (4.4%) of the respondents don’t know if they agree with the limit of 112 per year group.
16 respondents chose to make a comment in support of their response to this question. Nine of the comments received were made by those supportive of the proposed size of the school and included statements such as: ‘this allows it to remain a small, nurturing community school’ ‘this should ensure the school really will be a “local” school’ ‘the impact on traffic congestion should not be too unpleasant’.
A further seven comments were received from respondents who did not agree with the proposed size of the school and included statements such as: ‘will limit aspects of a broad and balanced curriculum’ ‘four groups at entry is still quite small and larger numbers would allow for greater choice of options at KS4’ ‘as of 2015 there is a huge increase in the number of children in the villages, before any further housing is built. It may be necessary to increase the numbers to 6FE’.
What we will do as a result of this feedback On the basis of this feedback we will continue with our proposal to manage Oakbank as a four form entry school.
We will work closely with the local community to ensure the support they have offered the school enables us to provide a rich and varied educational experience for all pupils.
We will ensure all pupils not only receive a broad and balanced curriculum during the core school day but also have access to varied and interesting extra-curricular activities at the school, led by school staff and other specialist providers such as local sports and music coaches/tutors.
As the local population grows as a consequence of new housing development, we will review our pupil numbers and consider, if supported by public opinion (via a formal consultation exercise), putting in an application to the Secretary of State for Education to increase our pupil admission numbers i.e. to become a 5FE or 6FE school. To a great extent any decision to expand will also be affected by Wokingham Borough’s current plans to relocate Emmbrook School to the Arborfield Garrison site and create additional local secondary school places.
Question 10 asked to what extent respondents were in favour of the proposal overall for Oakbank Secondary Free School as set out in the consultation document.
A total of 90 respondents answered this question; of these 94.5% had some interest in or were very strongly in favour of the proposal.
Summary of Responses
78 (86.7%) of the respondents were strongly in favour of the proposal for Oakbank Secondary Free School 7 (7.8%) of the respondents had some interest in the proposal for Oakbank Secondary Free School
2 (2.2%) of the respondents were not very interested in the proposal for Oakbank Secondary Free School 2 (2.2%) of the respondents were strongly against the proposal for Oakbank Secondary Free School 1 (1.1%) of the respondents didn’t know if they were in favour of the proposal for Oakbank Secondary Free School.
Seven respondents chose to submit comments supporting their response to this question. Five of the comments made were from those respondents who supported the free school proposal, with statements including: ‘A real boost for the area’ ‘It is exactly what the area needs!’ ‘I agree with quality and not quantity and hope that it will still be a very good school even if the pupil numbers are less.’
A further two comments were received from respondents who were not in favour of the proposal. These individuals felt: Having had two sons recently out of secondary education I would need persuading that a small secondary would meet their needs. If I were at this stage again, it would be a large risk sending my children to the school. Children only get one chance at schooling and it's a risk I would want to minimise. ‘The teachers will probably teach in two or more curriculum areas. In larger neighbouring schools the vast majority of teachers are able to focus on a single curriculum area and this in turn impacts on the quality of student outcomes.’
What we will do as a result of this feedback We are very encouraged by the overall level of commitment to the new school proposal by all stakeholders, and will therefore, subject to the outcomes of the Phase 2 consultation, move towards the signing of a Funding Agreement with the Secretary of State for Education.
In the meantime we will continue to work with those stakeholders who have particular concerns with aspects of our proposal to ensure, where possible, we can address their concerns. We will continue to work very closely with our prospective parents, local schools (primary and secondary), community groups, local authorities and Parish councils to ensure the new school can deliver on its promises and add real value both educationally and socially to the local area.
Question 11 asked: If relevant, how interested would you be in sending your child/children to Oakbank?
Of the 74 people who responded to this question, 91.9% said they would be interested in sending their child(ren) to the school.
Summary of Responses 58 (78.4%) of the respondents were very interested in sending their child/children to Oakbank 10 (13.5%) of the respondents were considering sending their child/children to Oakbank 3 (4.1%) of the respondents would not consider sending their child/children to Oakbank 3 (4.1%) of the respondents didn’t know if they would consider sending their child/children to Oakbank.
What we will do as a result of this feedback
This response demonstrates a strong pipeline of future students for Oakbank. We will ensure we work closely with these families both directly and via the feeder schools to ensure they are well informed about developments and achievements at Oakbank and that they have all the information required to decide whether or not Oakbank is the right school for their child(ren) in the future.
Question 12 asked those who responded positively to Question 11 above whether or not they had already submitted an application for a place at the school.
A total of 75 people answered this question, of these 65 (86.7%) said they had not submitted an application at this stage.
Question 13. In which calendar year would your child/children start at the school?
A total of 67 people answered this question 13; nine of these respondents are planning to send their children to Oakbank in September this year (2012). A total of five respondents’ children do not require a place at Oakbank and the remaining 53 hope their child will be accepted into Oakbank within the next five years.
Question 14 invited respondents to make any further comments they had regarding the Oakbank proposal.
A total of 33 respondents entered additional comments in this section. Many positive comments and messages of support for the school were submitted with the questionnaire and included comments such as these below:
‘We wholeheartedly support and have helped with this Application throughout the entire process. We have no doubt that this school will be a wonderful and inspiring institution.’
‘I am fully supportive of the proposal and believe that a genuine need exists for high quality secondary education provision in the area to the west of Wokingham. The proposed site will give a new lease of life to a range of purpose-built, very accessible school buildings set in a convenient and pleasant rural location. It is an ideal setting for a new school with a new vision.’
Respondents generally used this section of the questionnaire to comment on the admission arrangements and the curriculum. The concerns raised were mainly related to the catchment areas and how this affects the admission criteria. For example:
‘I think the admission criteria need to be clearer as I have read the criteria as that possibly, if there is high applications in future, children in Arborfield, Farley Hill and Swallowfield may not get a place as children applying from Lower Earley etc would??? Surely this is not your intention. I was considering this school but now may not.’
‘West Berkshire schools are concerned about the admission arrangements for 2012/2013, which are being arranged outside of the coordinated admissions round, and this may have a detrimental impact on pupils and families.’
Section 5: Other consultation feedback
In addition to the 108 online consultation questionnaires returned we also received nine written responses to the consultation, three of these were from local secondary schools, two from local authority officers, one from a local parish council, one from a local developer, one from a member of the local community and one from a parent from Lower Earley. These respondents felt that the online questionnaire had not allowed them to comment in sufficient detail on areas of particular concern.
Eight of the letters/emails were critical of one or more aspects of our proposal – one was very supportive.
The letters covered the following specific issues:
1. The technical application of the Admissions Code. 2. The proposed allocation of pupil places across the west and north of the Borough. 3. The limitations of the proposed curriculum due to its academic focus and the small size of the school. 4. The strategic need/lack of strategic need for additional secondary school places in the Borough.
Further details of the points made by the respondents can be made available on request.
Section 6: Questions and answers for key issues raised during consultation process
Q. What will the total school population be when it is fully operational? The consultation booklet suggested the school will grow to accommodate up to 800 pupils which seems high given you are only proposing 4 forms of entry each year? A. We apologise that this figure was misleading. If the school stays as a 4FE school it would only accommodate about 560 pupils at full capacity without a sixth form and 700-750 pupils with one, which is less than stated in the consultation leaflet.
Q. Is the inclusion of the founders’ children oversubscription criterion permissible within the current Admissions Code? A. As stated on the consultation leaflet this oversubscription criterion is still subject to the approval of the Secretary of State for Education at both a national and Oakbank level and will only be applied if approval is granted. If enforced, the criterion will only apply to five families and a maximum of six pupils over a period of two years.
Q. Is the use of segments permissible within the current Admissions Code? A. We discussed this proposal with the Department for Education who advised us that the use of segments and percentages within those segments are lawful within the terms of the schools Admission Code.
Q. Why can’t you apply simple ‘distance from school’ criteria in determining who is allocated places at Oakbank? A. CfBT School Trust (CST) and the West of Wokingham Parent Group (WoWPG) did not want to apply simple radial distance oversubscription criteria as this does not work well in rural settings. Doing so would put those families living in the villages to the west of the Wokingham borough at the same disadvantage when trying to access a place at Oakbank as they currently find with regard to other Wokingham Borough schools. They believe the adoption of the proposed segment approach balances the need to provide children south of the motorway with a viable local secondary school option whilst also providing those who live north of the motorway with an additional choice of schools to consider.
Q. What alternatives to the distance criteria (in the case of oversubscription) have been considered by Oakbank and why are they not being proposed? A. We considered a number of alternative oversubscription criteria for the school before settling on the segment option. We looked at creating a catchment (designated area) which ran south of the M4 and covered all the west of Wokingham villages. However, we were advised by the DfE that this would not be permissible as it excluded children from north of the motorway for whom Oakbank would be their nearest school. We looked at naming feeders schools in the west of Wokingham but again were advised by the DfE that this would not be lawful within the terms of the school’s Admission Code. We looked at applying a straight line distance from school but felt this would disadvantage west of Wokingham village children over Reading/north Wokingham borough children and replicate the problems created by all other schools currently applying this criteria i.e. west of Wokingham families having problems gaining a place at a local secondary school.
Q. What will happen if one or more segment is under subscribed? A. In the case of one or more segments being undersubscribed remaining places will be allocated to the other segments in line with the original proportions allocated, for example if the Grazeley/Three Mile Cross segment is undersubscribed by seven places, four of the remaining places will be allocated to the Spencers Wood/ Swallowfield segment and three to the Shinfield/Earley/south Reading segment.
Q. Why do the proposed catchment segments have no outer boundaries? A. We have now set an outer boundary limit at four miles. Families living beyond this boundary will still be able to apply for places at the school but will be covered by the oversubscription criteria: Other applicants.
Q. Please explain how the weightings across the segments were derived, and show how they are linked to the population of children of relevant age within each of the segments and the access to other secondary provision within reasonable travelling distance. A. The original idea for a free school in the west of the Wokingham borough came from a group of local parents frustrated at the lack of local secondary school places in the area following the closure of Ryeish Green School in 2010. They wanted a good quality secondary school serving the local community which would provide reduced travel times for pupils and allow them to progress to secondary school alongside their primary school friends.
Aware of the issues caused by the application of a simple ‘distance from school’ criterion for school admissions, which is the root cause of many of the village families’ problems in gaining a place at a Wokingham borough school, Oakbank has proposed the creation of a number of segments as the basis for the allocation of school places. The rationale for the allocation of percentages within the sectors has been based on the density of housing in each sector, and the opportunity of gaining a place at another school within a reasonable distance.
The Shinfield segment has been allocated 30% of the available spaces on the basis that, although it serves a fairly densely populated area of north west Wokingham (including Lower Earley) and South Reading, many pupils have access to other Reading and Wokingham secondary schools including: Bulmershe; Maiden Erlegh; John Madejski Academy and Reading Girls School which are all located within a reasonable travel distance of children’s homes i.e. within three miles.
The Grazeley and Three Mile Cross segment has been allocated 30% of the available spaces on the basis that, although it serves a much less densely populated area, these pupils are most disadvantaged when trying to secure places in any secondary school in Hampshire, West Berkshire, Wokingham or Reading owing to their relative distance from all local schools which they might look to apply to i.e. a travel distance of more than 3 miles. A further 274 houses are also already under construction in this segment, with more expected to begin by the end of the year.
The Spencers Wood and Swallowfield segment has been allocated 40% of the available spaces on the basis that the area is fairly densely populated, taking in a number of fairly large settlements including Arborfield/Arborfield Cross, Swallowfield and Spencers Wood and that families also find themselves with very limited choice over which secondary school they are allocated. All secondary school options, even if available, involve long travel times/distances for most children i.e. more than 3 miles.
Oakbank believes that this allocation ensures that children living near to the school will be able to attend, while also ensuring that those living in the rural area which struggle most with accessing local secondary places of their choice, have the opportunity to attend a local school.
Q. Why can’t each village be in the same segment – Arborfield (around Church Lane) currently falls in two segments. Would it be possible to correct this anomaly? A. Unfortunately however the segment lines are drawn one community or another ends up being split. We needed to ensure that segments are as near as possible of equal size. However we have now redrawn the segment boundaries so that they follow roads rather than arbitrary lines so it is clear which segment each household lies within. See map provided in section C.
Q. If the weighting of the PAN (Pupil Admission Numbers) is changed as a result of oversubscription from one segment, how will this be corrected for future years? Like all other schools, Oakbank is able to propose changes to its admission criteria on an annual basis via a formal consultation process. If we find that our initial assumptions re segment allocations were wrong, or if significant changes in populations occur i.e. a large number of families with secondary-aged children move into new housing developments within the local area, we will certainly review and amend the current segment allocations as appropriate.
Q. Will the PAN weightings be reviewed in line with development of the various Strategic Development Locations (SDLs) that fall within the catchment area? A. Yes, as detailed above. At present it appears that planned development will affect all segments but some more than others. However until the outcomes of any planning decisions are known it is difficult to predict the impact of any such developments accurately. Further we are advised by the developers that the housing is likely to cause a peak in demand for primary places initially and that the impact on secondary places may lag a few years behind.
Q. Why do we need this new school when there are surplus places in other schools within the Borough? A. CfBT Schools Trust and the West of Wokingham Parent Group acknowledge that there is currently excellent education provision within the borough. However, due to the geographical location of most of the schools, families living in the west of the borough either cannot secure places at these schools, or are not happy with the long travel times they create for their children. They do not believe that Wokingham Borough Council’s Core Strategy takes their needs sufficiently into account, hence their decision to submit a Free School application.
Q. What will happen to Oakbank School when the new school planned for the Arborfield Garrison site is opened? A. CfBT Schools Trust and the West of Wokingham Parent Group believe that there will be sufficient demand for places at both Oakbank and the relocated Emmbrook School on the Arborfield Garrison site, given our stated intention to limit the size of Oakbank School and the large-scale housing developments planned for the local area. Even when built the new school will still be located at a considerable distance from some of the village families who believe Oakbank will provide a more local and community based provision for their children.
Q. Why are admissions to Oakbank being handled by the school directly and why is the process not aligned to the Wokingham Borough Council system? Unfortunately it was not possible, owing to the timing of the Secretary of State’s approval of our Free School application, to align our 2012 admissions round with that of Wokingham Borough Council. However from next year the two processes will be aligned.
Q. How will your proposed curriculum address the needs of students who are less able to cope with academic subjects?
We will work with our Principal Designate on the detailed planning of the curriculum taking into account the specific feedback about the need to offer a broad and balanced curriculum to all pupils, in particular to ensure the curriculum is accessible and appropriate for those for whom a purely academic curriculum may not be suited. This will include the provision of subjects covering the arts, technology and sports which will be available to all pupils.
We have also revised the proposed timetable to give some subjects more/less time and we have also decided all pupils will have the same allocation of subject lessons.
Section 7: Conclusion and Next Steps
On the basis of the responses received in phase 1 of the Oakbank consultation process as detailed in this report, we believe that the majority of stakeholders support both the overriding principle of setting up a new secondary free school in the West of Wokingham and for the specific characteristics of Oakbank we are proposing. Having taken into account the feedback provided we have revised certain aspects of our proposal and feel we are now in a position to move into phase two of the consultation process which asks whether or not we should now enter the funding agreement with the secretary of state to open Oakbank. This consultation phase runs from 8th to 22nd February 2012. We will continue to work with all stakeholders up to and beyond the opening of the school to address all concerns and issues, groups or individuals may have.
If you have any questions about this report or phase two consultation please contact Jayne Soanes c/o [email protected] in the first instance.
Please find below a link to the second phase of the Oakbank consultation process http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/oakbank_consultation2
Appendix A: Stakeholder consultation list
1. Local primary schools The following state primary schools received sufficient copies of the consultation leaflet for every Year 5 and 6 child in the school. These were sent home with pupils, via the pupil book bags or other means, as agreed with the individual school headteachers. The Ridgeway Whiteknights Hillside Shinfield St Mary’s Grazeley Parochial Lambs Lane Farley Hill The Coombes C of E Primary
The following primary schools were offered multiple copies but did not respond to the invitation. Instead, 10 copies of the leaflets were sent to the headteacher and the chair of governors. Geoffrey Fields Whitley Park
The headteachers and chairs of governors of the following local state/non-state primary schools were also sent 10 copies each of the leaflet. Vine Christian School Sefton Park Crossfield School Christ the King School
2. Local secondary schools The headteachers and chairs of governors of the following local state/non-state secondary schools were also sent 10 copies each of the leaflet. The Holt (Wokingham) Forest School (Wokingham) Maiden Erlegh (Wokingham) Bulmershe (Wokingham) Emmbrook (Wokingham) St Crispin’s (Wokingham) Yateley School (Yateley – Hampshire) Willink School (Burghfield – West Berkshire) Madejski Academy (Reading) Leighton Park (Reading – Independent)
3. Local authorities 10–20 copies of the leaflets were sent to each of the following local authorities. Wokingham Borough Council (10 to the Schools Admission Team and 10 to the Strategic Commissioner for Young People) Reading Borough Council (10 to the Schools Admission Team and 10 to the Education Assets Manager) West Berkshire Council (10 to the Corporate Director for Children’s Services) Hampshire County Council (10 to the Director of Children’s Services)
4. Other stakeholders The following groups/individuals were also send personal copies of the leaflet. The Right Honourable John Redwood (local MP) Barton Willmore – local construction consortium Gleeson’s – local construction consortium Berkshire Maestros Shinfield Parish Council officers HIVE at Arborfield Garrison Swallowfield Preschool Chapel Lane Nursery Tree Tops Nursery Shinfield Infants Red Kite Children’s Centre The WI Shinfield Volunteer Group Reading Rockets Spencers Wood Football Club Whiteknights Estate Agents Davis Tate Estate Agents Numerous copies of the leaflet were also left in the following public service points/meeting points: Swallowfield Medical Practice (plus surgeries at Arborfield and Shinfield) Shinfield Health Centre Spencers Wood Library Cafe Active, St Michael’s Church Shinfield Baptist Church Barkham Church St Mary’s Parish Hall Spencers Wood Village Hall Swallowfield Village Hall Grazeley Village Hall Arborfield Village Hall Barkham Village Hall Anita’s Hair & Beauty Chandlers Hair Salon Shinfield Post Office Grovelands Garden Centre Spencers Wood Post Office
5. Local residents Hard copies of the leaflet were posted through the doors of all the houses in Hyde End Lane, Church Lane and the surrounding lanes.
6. WoWPG/Oakbank supporters An email with a link to the consultation document was sent to all registered WoWPG/Oakbank supporters which includes 420 names.
7. Oakbank prospective students An email with a link to the consultation document was sent to all (90) families who have submitted applications for places at Oakbank School in September 2012.
8. Attendance at local community events Members of the WoWPG group attended a ‘Respect’ evening at Spencers Wood Football Club on 14 January where they provided information to local residents about Oakbank and the consultation process.
Appendix B: Proposed revised admission procedures for Oakbank
Proposed Oakbank admission arrangements for Year 7 students 2012-2013 only
January 2012
Admission to Oakbank (Secondary Free School)
1. Oakbank is a publically funded, co-educational, secondary free school, sponsored by CfBT Schools Trust (CST).
2. Responsibility for the admission of pupils in 2012 rests with the School’s Shadow Governing Body who are authorised to undertake this activity on behalf of CfBT Schools Trust.
3. All applications for places at the school will be considered in accordance with the arrangements set out below.
Admissions to Year 7 in September 2012
Agreed admission number
4. The school will admit 84 pupils to Year 7 in September 2012. From September 2013 the school will admit up to 112 pupils per year.
Application Form
5. Applicants for admission to Year 7 in 2012-2013 must complete the CST Oakbank application form which should be returned directly to CST.
6. The application form must be completed and returned to the CST by midnight on 19 February 20121. This date takes into account the need to accept applications up to the point when formal consultation on our proposed admissions arrangements has ended.
Late applications
7. Applications received after the closing date of 19 February will be treated as ‘late’ applications and be considered after all on-time applications have been allocated. However, applications that are received late for a good reason will be treated as on time if received before midday on 27 February 20123. Such good reasons might be if illness prevented a single parent/carer from returning the form on time, or the family moved to the area after the closing date. The reason for lateness must be supported by a medical professional or documentary evidence to confirm the family move. If no evidence is provided it will be assumed that an application could have been made by the closing date and the application will not be processed until after 15 March 2012. Late applications will only be considered in exceptional circumstances and entirely at the discretion of a nominated CST Trustee and the Principal Designate, acting together on behalf of the Shadow Governing Body.
8. After 15 March and before 31 August 2012 late applications will be considered in line with the published admissions criteria. If the school is oversubscribed the pupil’s name will be added to a waiting list in accordance with the oversubscription criteria. You will be asked if you wish your child’s name to be added to/remain on the waiting list.
3 The application process for places at Oakbank from 2013 will follow standard Wokingham Borough Council timescales.
Verification of information
9. All applicants will be required to produce proof of residence (i.e. a utility bill) and an original or certified copy of a birth certificate. The Governing Body also reserves the right to seek verification from the local authority in which the applicant is resident.
10. False information, or the omission of material information, may result in disqualification or the loss of a place after it has been offered, accepted or taken up.
Offer of places
11. Letters informing applicants of the outcome of their applications will be sent by first- class post on 1 March 2012.
12. Applicants to whom places are offered will be required to inform the Governing Body of their decision whether to accept or reject the offer by the date given in the letter of offer.
Appeals procedure
13. Parents/carers whose applications for places are unsuccessful will be given an opportunity to appeal against the decision to an Independent Appeal Panel, set up in accordance with the Statutory provisions in force at the time.
14. The determination of the appeal is binding on all parties.
15. Full details of the procedure will be sent to parents with the decision letter on 1 March 2012.
16. In addition to the right to appeal, unsuccessful applicants will be offered an opportunity to be placed on the waiting list.
Waiting list
17. After 1 March 2012 a ‘waiting list’ will be kept where it has not been possible to offer every child who applied a place at the school. The waiting list will be ranked according to the oversubscription criteria for the school. When a place becomes available this will be offered to the next pupil on the waiting list. Positions on the waiting list may go up or down due to student withdrawals or new arrivals and no account is taken of the length of time spent on the waiting list.
18. Waiting lists will be maintained until such time as the policy is changed, to fill places that may become available during the school year. Parents will receive periodic requests to see if they wish to remain on the list.
19. Children who are the subject of a direction by the local authority to admit or who are allocated to Oakbank School in accordance with an in-year fair access protocol will take precedence over those on the waiting list.
Oversubscription criteria
20. If there are more applicants than places, places will be offered in accordance with the following criteria in order of priority: 1. Children with a statement of special educational needs that names Oakbank on their statement will be allocated a place above all other applicants. 2. Children in public care (children looked after by a local authority under section 22 of the Children Act 19894) at the time an application for admission to the school is made, and who the local authority has confirmed will still be looked after at the time when admitted to the school. 3. From 2013, children with a brother or sister who will be attending the school at the time of proposed admission. The children concerned must be living at the same address. 4. Children of founders of the school (please note this criterion is still subject to approval by the Secretary of State for Education at a national level as well as in relation to Oakbank). 5. Children living nearest to the school measured as the crow flies, that is in a straight line from the child’s home to the main entrance of the school (travel by private car or public transport is not taken into account) within each of three identified segments in the following proportions: a. Shinfield segment (30% of remaining PAN) b. Grazeley and Three Mile Cross segment (30% of remaining PAN) c. Spencers Wood and Swallowfield segment (40% of remaining PAN) d. The boundaries of the segments are set out in the attached map. In the case of one or more segments being undersubscribed, remaining places will be allocated to the other segments in line with the original proportions allocated, for example if the Grazeley and Three Mile Cross segment is undersubscribed by seven places, four of the remaining places will be allocated to the Spencers Wood and Swallowfield segment and three to the Shinfield segment. 6. Other applicants. After places have been filled under the first five criteria, any remaining places will be offered to children living beyond the identified segment boundaries i.e. at a distance of more than four miles from the school. Where the number of applicants in this category exceeds the number of places, offers will be determined by random allocation.
Sibling priority
21. ‘Siblings’ means two or more children who have at least one parent/carer in common and who reside in the same home as one another. Where a child has been legally adopted, he or she will be regarded as the sibling of any other children with the same legal guardian, all of whom reside in the same household.
Twins and same-year siblings
22. Where applications are received from twins, triplets or same-year siblings the following procedures of normal oversubscription criteria will be applied. In the event that it is not possible to offer places to all children of multiple births, an additional place(s) would be allocated to the other sibling(s).
4 The classification of children within this group will be amended for admissions to Oakbank in 2013 in line with the new DfE Schools Admissions Code.
Distance from the home to the school
23. The distance from home to Oakbank School is the straight-line distance measured from the front door of the child’s residence to the main entrance of the school site. The data for the property is the unique address point for each property as supplied by Ordnance Survey. 24. A child’s permanent address is the place of normal residence during term time. Where parental responsibility is shared, the address of the parent/guardian who receives Child Benefit Allowance for the child will be taken as the permanent address. 25. Proof of residence can be requested at any time throughout the admissions process. If false or misleading information is used to gain entry to the school, the offer of a place will be withdrawn and an appeal offered.
Tie-breaker
26. In the event of two or more applicants tying when any of the admission criteria are applied, positions will be determined by random allocation. For example, this may occur when children in the same year group live at the address e.g. in a block of flats or if the distance between the home and the school is exactly the same.
Other admissions (in-year or casual admissions)
27. Applications for vacancies that arise outside the normal annual admissions round for Year 7 will be considered at any time during the year. Information and application forms may be obtained from the School c/o CfBT Schools Trust. Where there is more than one application for a vacant place, the offer of the place will be determined in accordance with the following criteria in order of priority: 1. Children with statements of Special Education Needs in which the School is named on the statement 2. Children in public care (children looked after by a local authority under section 22 of the Children Act 1989) 3. Children who will have siblings in the school at the time when they are admitted to the school 4. Children who live nearest to the school, measured by the straight-line distance from the school to the child’s home. 28. If no places are available the child will be placed on the waiting list with their position ranked according to the above criteria. 29. The School may refuse admission to applicants who have been permanently excluded from two or more other schools. The ability to refuse admissions runs for a period of two years since the last exclusion. Exclusions which took place before the child concerned reached compulsory school age do not count for this purpose. The school will consult and co-ordinate its arrangements, including over the rapid re- integration of children who have been excluded from other schools, and who arrive in an area after the normal admissions round, in accordance with local in-year fair access protocols for securing schools for unplaced children.
Appendix C: Proposed Revised Admissions Area
The attached map has been revised to make it clearer which of the three proposed segments of the schools catchment households fall within.
Instead of drawing the segment boundaries as arbitrary lines on the map, the segment lines now follow, as far as possible, major roadways. Households will be designated as living either one side of the road or the other in terms of their segment position. The new road boundaries follow as closely as possible the original boundary lines set. Unfortunately some communities are still split by the segment boundaries but it was impossible to achieve equally sized segments without doing this.
The segment boundary between the Three Mile Cross/Grazeley segment and the Spencers Wood/Swallowfield segment will run from the school north west along Hyde End Lane, south west along Church Lane, and then south along Basingstoke Road towards Spencers Wood before going in a south west direction towards Beech Hill.
The segment boundary between the Spencers Wood/Swallowfield segment and the Shinfield/South Reading/Lower Earley segment will run from the school south east along Hyde End lane down to the B3349 (Hyde End Road), north up to the A327 (Arborfield Road) to Arborfield Cross, then along the B 3349 towards Barkham.
The segment boundary between Shinfield/South Reading/Lower Early segment and the Three Mile Cross/Grazeley segment will run from the school north west along Hyde End Lane, south west along Church Lane and then north along the Basingstoke Road, before joining the A33, crossing the M4 and running north along the new A33 (Reading Relief Road).
A new outer limit to the segment boundaries has also been set at a radial distance of four miles from Oakbank School in all directions.
We will produce an updated version of the map as soon as our admissions criteria are approved.
Phase 2
Consultation Report
February 2012
1
Section 1: Executive summary
The proposal is to open a new secondary free school in the west of the Wokingham Borough in September 2012. The school, which will be known as Oakbank, will initially be a four form entry 11–16 school. The free school is sponsored by CfBT Schools Trust (CST), working in partnership with the West of Wokingham Parent Group (WoWPG). The school plans to open with its first cohort of Year 7 pupils in September 2012 and grow organically year on year until all year groups are in place in 2016, or 2018 if a sixth form provision is offered.
Phase 1 of the consultation process, conducted by CfBT Schools Trust, ran from 6 December 2011 to 16 January 2012. 108 individuals/organisations completed the online survey with a further ten responding by email/letter. All those who were invited to participate in Phase 1 of the consultation process and those of you that gave us feedback were invited to participate in the Phase 2 consultation process which ran from 22 January to 8 February 2012. This phase of consultation consisted of an online questionnaire which asked:
Q1: Having seen a copy of the Oakbank Consultation Feedback Report, and our proposed solutions to the issues raised, do you believe CfBT Schools Trust should:
A: Enter into a funding agreement with the secretary of State for Education
B: Not Enter into a funding agreement with the secretary of State for Education
2
172 individuals/organisations completed this second online survey. Of these 167 (97.7%) felt CfBT should enter into a funding agreement with the Secretary of State for Education.
We received many very positive comments in support of the school opening such as:
‘I feel that the area is in dire need of a secondary school, the proposed site is perfect for the purpose. The concept of the free school is such a positive one and I look forward to seeing it in practice’.
Other quotes received were from the Chair of Governors of Shinfield Infant and Nursery School and from Shinfield Parish Council, as shown below.
‘As Chair of Governors of Shinfield Infant and Nursery School I am fully supportive of a secondary school in this area’
‘Oakbank is going to be the centre point and focus of a new community in our area which will benefit every individual in the surrounding villages - Shinfield Parish Council remains fully supportive’
We received a small number of responses (5 in total), that were not supportive of CfBT signing the funding agreement; these individuals/groups were concerned about the financial viability of the school and the ‘fitness for purpose’ of the revised admissions arrangements.
Section 2: Conclusion and Next Steps
On the basis of the responses received in Phase 2 of the Oakbank consultation process as detailed in this report, we believe that the majority of stakeholders support both the overriding principle of setting up a new secondary free school in the West of the Wokingham Borough; and CfBT entering the Funding Agreement with the Secretary of State to open Oakbank.
Copies of this report will now be sent to all consultation respondents and other identified stakeholders including the DfE.
We will now begin the process of agreeing our Funding Agreement for Oakbank with the Secretary of State for Education, which we hope to have in place by the end of March 2012.
We will continue to work with all stakeholders up to and beyond the opening of the school to address all concerns and issues, groups or individuals may have.
If you have any questions about this report or the consultation process undertaken please contacts Jayne Soanes c/o [email protected] in the first instance.
3
Appendix B: Proposed revised admission procedures for Oakbank
Proposed Oakbank admission arrangements for Year 7 students 2012-2013 only
January 2012
Admission to Oakbank (Secondary Free School)
1. Oakbank is a publically funded, co-educational, secondary free school, sponsored by CfBT Schools Trust (CST).
2. Responsibility for the admission of pupils in 2012 rests with the School’s Shadow Governing Body who are authorised to undertake this activity on behalf of CfBT Schools Trust.
3. All applications for places at the school will be considered in accordance with the arrangements set out below.
Admissions to Year 7 in September 2012
Agreed admission number
4. The school will admit 84 pupils to Year 7 in September 2012. From September 2013 the school will admit up to 112 pupils per year.
Application Form
5. Applicants for admission to Year 7 in 2012-2013 must complete the CST Oakbank application form which should be returned directly to CST.
6. The application form must be completed and returned to the CST by midnight on 19 February 20121. This date takes into account the need to accept applications up to the point when formal consultation on our proposed admissions arrangements has ended.
Late applications
7. Applications received after the closing date of 19 February will be treated as ‘late’ applications and be considered after all on-time applications have been allocated. However, applications that are received late for a good reason will be treated as on time if received before midday on 27 February 20121. Such good reasons might be if illness prevented a single parent/carer from returning the form on time, or the family moved to the area after the closing date. The reason for lateness must be supported by a medical professional or documentary evidence to confirm the family move. If no evidence is provided it will be assumed that an application could have been made by the closing date and the application will not be processed until after 15 March 2012. Late applications will only be considered in exceptional circumstances and entirely at the discretion of a nominated CST Trustee and the Principal Designate, acting together on behalf of the Shadow Governing Body.
8. After 15 March and before 31 August 2012 late applications will be considered in line with the published admissions criteria. If the school is oversubscribed the pupil’s name will be added to a waiting list in accordance with the oversubscription criteria. You will be asked if you wish your child’s name to be added to/remain on the waiting list.
1 The application process for places at Oakbank from 2013 will follow standard Wokingham Borough Council timescales.
Verification of information
9. All applicants will be required to produce proof of residence (i.e. a utility bill) and an original or certified copy of a birth certificate. The Governing Body also reserves the right to seek verification from the local authority in which the applicant is resident.
10. False information, or the omission of material information, may result in disqualification or the loss of a place after it has been offered, accepted or taken up.
Offer of places
11. Letters informing applicants of the outcome of their applications will be sent by first- class post on 1 March 2012.
12. Applicants to whom places are offered will be required to inform the Governing Body of their decision whether to accept or reject the offer by the date given in the letter of offer.
Appeals procedure
13. Parents/carers whose applications for places are unsuccessful will be given an opportunity to appeal against the decision to an Independent Appeal Panel, set up in accordance with the Statutory provisions in force at the time.
14. The determination of the appeal is binding on all parties.
15. Full details of the procedure will be sent to parents with the decision letter on 1 March 2012.
16. In addition to the right to appeal, unsuccessful applicants will be offered an opportunity to be placed on the waiting list.
Waiting list
17. After 1 March 2012 a ‘waiting list’ will be kept where it has not been possible to offer every child who applied a place at the school. The waiting list will be ranked according to the oversubscription criteria for the school. When a place becomes available this will be offered to the next pupil on the waiting list. Positions on the waiting list may go up or down due to student withdrawals or new arrivals and no account is taken of the length of time spent on the waiting list.
18. Waiting lists will be maintained until such time as the policy is changed, to fill places that may become available during the school year. Parents will receive periodic requests to see if they wish to remain on the list.
19. Children who are the subject of a direction by the local authority to admit or who are allocated to Oakbank School in accordance with an in-year fair access protocol will take precedence over those on the waiting list.
Oversubscription criteria
20. If there are more applicants than places, places will be offered in accordance with the following criteria in order of priority: 1. Children with a statement of special educational needs that names Oakbank on their statement will be allocated a place above all other applicants. 2. Children in public care (children looked after by a local authority under section 22 of the Children Act 19892) at the time an application for admission to the school is made, and who the local authority has confirmed will still be looked after at the time when admitted to the school. 3. From 2013, children with a brother or sister who will be attending the school at the time of proposed admission. The children concerned must be living at the same address. 4. Children of founders of the school (please note this criterion is still subject to approval by the Secretary of State for Education at a national level as well as in relation to Oakbank). 5. Children living nearest to the school measured as the crow flies, that is in a straight line from the child’s home to the main entrance of the school (travel by private car or public transport is not taken into account) within each of three identified segments in the following proportions: a. Shinfield segment (30% of remaining PAN) b. Grazeley and Three Mile Cross segment (30% of remaining PAN) c. Spencers Wood and Swallowfield segment (40% of remaining PAN) d. The boundaries of the segments are set out in the attached map. In the case of one or more segments being undersubscribed, remaining places will be allocated to the other segments in line with the original proportions allocated, for example if the Grazeley and Three Mile Cross segment is undersubscribed by seven places, four of the remaining places will be allocated to the Spencers Wood and Swallowfield segment and three to the Shinfield segment. 6. Other applicants. After places have been filled under the first five criteria, any remaining places will be offered to children living beyond the identified segment boundaries i.e. at a distance of more than four miles from the school. Where the number of applicants in this category exceeds the number of places, offers will be determined by random allocation.
Sibling priority
21. ‘Siblings’ means two or more children who have at least one parent/carer in common and who reside in the same home as one another. Where a child has been legally adopted, he or she will be regarded as the sibling of any other children with the same legal guardian, all of whom reside in the same household.
Twins and same-year siblings
2 The classification of children within this group will be amended for admissions to Oakbank in 2013 in line with the new DfE Schools Admissions Code. 22. Where applications are received from twins, triplets or same-year siblings the following procedures of normal oversubscription criteria will be applied. In the event that it is not possible to offer places to all children of multiple births, an additional place(s) would be allocated to the other sibling(s).
Distance from the home to the school
23. The distance from home to Oakbank School is the straight-line distance measured from the front door of the child’s residence to the main entrance of the school site. The data for the property is the unique address point for each property as supplied by Ordnance Survey. 24. A child’s permanent address is the place of normal residence during term time. Where parental responsibility is shared, the address of the parent/guardian who receives Child Benefit Allowance for the child will be taken as the permanent address. 25. Proof of residence can be requested at any time throughout the admissions process. If false or misleading information is used to gain entry to the school, the offer of a place will be withdrawn and an appeal offered.
Tie-breaker
26. In the event of two or more applicants tying when any of the admission criteria are applied, positions will be determined by random allocation. For example, this may occur when children in the same year group live at the address e.g. in a block of flats or if the distance between the home and the school is exactly the same.
Other admissions (in-year or casual admissions)
27. Applications for vacancies that arise outside the normal annual admissions round for Year 7 will be considered at any time during the year. Information and application forms may be obtained from the School c/o CfBT Schools Trust. Where there is more than one application for a vacant place, the offer of the place will be determined in accordance with the following criteria in order of priority: 1. Children with statements of Special Education Needs in which the School is named on the statement 2. Children in public care (children looked after by a local authority under section 22 of the Children Act 1989) 3. Children who will have siblings in the school at the time when they are admitted to the school 4. Children who live nearest to the school, measured by the straight-line distance from the school to the child’s home. 28. If no places are available the child will be placed on the waiting list with their position ranked according to the above criteria. 29. The School may refuse admission to applicants who have been permanently excluded from two or more other schools. The ability to refuse admissions runs for a period of two years since the last exclusion. Exclusions which took place before the child concerned reached compulsory school age do not count for this purpose. The school will consult and co-ordinate its arrangements, including over the rapid re- integration of children who have been excluded from other schools, and who arrive in an area after the normal admissions round, in accordance with local in-year fair access protocols for securing schools for unplaced children. Appendix C: Proposed Revised Admissions Area
The attached map has been revised to make it clearer which of the three proposed segments of the schools catchment households fall within.
Instead of drawing the segment boundaries as arbitrary lines on the map, the segment lines now follow, as far as possible, major roadways. Households will be designated as living either one side of the road or the other in terms of their segment position. The new road boundaries follow as closely as possible the original boundary lines set. Unfortunately some communities are still split by the segment boundaries but it was impossible to achieve equally sized segments without doing this.
The segment boundary between the Three Mile Cross/Grazeley segment and the Spencers Wood/Swallowfield segment will run from the school north west along Hyde End Lane, south west along Church Lane, and then south along Basingstoke Road towards Spencers Wood before going in a south west direction towards Beech Hill.
The segment boundary between the Spencers Wood/Swallowfield segment and the Shinfield/South Reading/Lower Earley segment will run from the school south east along Hyde End lane down to the B3349 (Hyde End Road), north up to the A327 (Arborfield Road) to Arborfield Cross, then along the B 3349 towards Barkham.
The segment boundary between Shinfield/South Reading/Lower Early segment and the Three Mile Cross/Grazeley segment will run from the school north west along Hyde End Lane, south west along Church Lane and then north along the Basingstoke Road, before joining the A33, crossing the M4 and running north along the new A33 (Reading Relief Road).
A new outer limit to the segment boundaries has also been set at a radial distance of four miles from Oakbank School in all directions.
We will produce an updated version of the map as soon as our admissions criteria are approved.
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
Sandymoor Free School
Stakeholder Consultation
Report on the outcomes of the Stakeholder Consultation 16th January 2012 – 18th March 2012
30 April 2012
1 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
Contents
Page
Contents 2
Executive Summary 3
Section 1 Introduction and Background 4
Section 2 Consultation Programme 7
Section 3 Responses to the Consultation 9
Section 4 Analysis of Consultation Responses 25
Section 5 Summary of Consultation Outcomes 28
Appendices
Appendix 1 Stakeholder Consultation Strategy 29
Appendix 2 Stakeholder Consultation Questions 31
Appendix 3 Stakeholder Consultation Letter 32
Appendix 4 Stakeholder Consultation Leaflet Text 33
2 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
Executive Summary
1. The formal consultation period ran for ten weeks from 16th January to 18th March 2012.
2. 5000 Consultation leaflets were distributed to local residents, primary and secondary schools, council members, local community groups and other local organisations.
3. Overall 133 responses to the consultation were received, two letters and 131 responses to the website questionnaire.
4. 92.4% of the website respondents support the Free School proposal.
5. 7.6% of the website respondents, one secondary school (letter) and one college (letter) were opposed to the Free School proposal.
6. Three meetings were held with various groups during the consultation period.
7. A total of 210 people attended the three different consultation meetings.
8. 48% of the website questionnaire respondents provided further information about their views on the Free School proposal.
9. The questions raised by the attendees at the public consultation meeting on 28th January 2012 are listed in the record of the meeting in section 3(a).
10. The additional comments provided by respondents to the website questionnaire in support of or opposed to the Free School proposal is provided in section 3(c).
11. Whilst there was some opposition to the proposal from two local education institutions and a small number local residents the vast majority of respondents to the stakeholder consultation were supportive of the Sandymoor Free School proposal.
3 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
Section 1 Introduction and background
In response to the Government initiative the Proposer Group submitted a proposal to establish a Free School in Sandymoor, East Runcorn in October 2011. It demonstrated the need for a secondary school within Sandymoor by describing the provision for secondary education in both its own local authority, Halton Borough Council, and those in the locality.
The Proposer Group contended that with the exception of one local secondary school the alternative schools are currently over-subscribed or near to full subscription and students within the Sandymoor area would fail to meet the over-subscription criteria based on the “distance from school” rule. The Proposer Group acknowledged Halton Borough Council’s vision is to be able to educate all students of secondary age within the Local Authority’s secondary schools but demonstrated in their submission that whilst this might be possible the authority is unable to place all students of secondary age within the Local Authority’s schools that perform at or above the national average. Additionally, the Group contended that the Local Authority does not have the capacity to cope with an estimated bulge of 100 additional students by 2015 and that with additional house building during this period; the situation is likely to only get worse.
The proposal explains that at present parental choice is exercised and demonstrated by the amount of student migration out of Halton for secondary education and those specifically from the Sandymoor, Moore and Daresbury areas of East Runcorn. This is contrary to section 14(3A) of the Education Act 1996, which places a statutory duty on the Local Authority to provide a diversity in the schools and increase the opportunities for parental choice. Sandymoor Parish Council approached Halton Borough Council to enquire how this balance is to be rectified. The Local Authority’s Core Strategy Document does not address this issue although it does include the requirement for an additional 3050 houses and shows plans to develop these in the Sandymoor and Daresbury areas.
The graph on page 5 shows Halton’s secondary schools performance compared to both its neighbouring boroughs and the national average. It clearly shows that Halton secondary schools’ performance is below the national average. The schools that perform best and above the national average are the schools that it is least likely for children from East Runcorn to be able to attend due to their over-subscription.
As the current chosen secondary schools are only accessible by car or bus, the majority of students attending secondary schools from the Sandymoor area are not able to walk or cycle to school. Numerous Government studies have cited that in childhood healthy travel to school maximises the potential of adults chances of choosing a healthy travel option in future life. In addition, the outcomes of the survey of local parents in the proposal demonstrated that there is a demand within the local area for the provision of a greater choice of secondary education and that there is sufficient, local parental demand to support the proposed Free School.
4 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
65.0%
61.3% 60.0% 59.8% Warrington 56.40% 55.0% 53.3% Halton 50.60% 50.0% 49.9% 49.3% 50.1% Cheshire West & Chester 45.0% 44.6% England (state funded 41.1% 40.0% schools only)
35.0% 2007 2008 2009 2010
Source Department for Education
The proposal concludes that parental demand has shown that an additional choice of high quality education in East Runcorn is required. The provision of a school within Sandymoor will be beneficial for parental choice, healthy and sustainable school travel can be demonstrated by parental demand and their current choice of secondary education. It will also have benefits to the local community by creating a community focus coupled with increased community amenities.
The proposal submitted to the DfE provides the following outline for Sandymoor School. It will provide education for students aged 11 to 18 comprising both a secondary school and sixth form and is planned to be located within Sandymoor to facilitate walking to school. The school will have a Year 7 intake of 120 students and of 150 students into the sixth form. It will specialise in Science, Technology, Enterprise and Sport and will quickly become a nationally recognised school in these areas. With an emphasis on producing intelligent students through innovative approaches and monitoring methods, the school will be able to track the progress of each individual student in each lesson to ensure maximum individual attainment is reached. Sandymoor School will provide a broad and balanced curriculum that meets the needs and aspirations of each child. Both academic and vocational qualifications will be offered at Key Stage 4 and 5 and while the Key Stage 4 offer is balanced, the curriculum at Key Stage 5 will focus more closely on science, technology, enterprise and sport. The education vision for the school is stated as:
“An 11-18 school producing intelligent, employable global citizens that demonstrate social competence, a desire for learning and respect for each other and the world around us. The school will be recognised for excellence in science, technology, enterprise and sport.”
The proposal states that this will be delivered through: 1. An innovative pedagogical approach embracing the digital shift, enhanced curriculum planning and strong links to industry.
5 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
2. The empowerment of students by providing open and transparent communication with staff about all aspects of school operations. 3. Parental engagement to be involved in the learning process, and encourage the continuity of school activities in the home. 4. A connection to the local community through student-led social enterprises and activities, as well as the involvement of local industries to enhance the curriculum. 5. Strong links with schools around the world to share delivery between schools and discuss ‘in-country’ issues, as well as capitalising on their expertise. 6. Concepts such as personalised learning and learning power, which will be a key pedagogical driver.
These principles are to be underpinned through a financially sustainable and entrepreneurial approach to learning and school development in addition to an acknowledgement, and active protection, of the local environment.
The Proposer Group believes that this vision statement embraces the new and exciting ways of educating local children as well as embracing the concepts of the ‘big society’. Although some aspects seem ambitious, they believe that these are achievable and will stand as models of good practice for others in the future. They describe the vision as based less on content knowledge and understanding and more on the key attributes of employable and enterprising individuals.
The Stakeholder Consultation Strategy was set out on pages 76 to 78 of the proposal and is included for reference as Appendix 1 of this report. The purpose of the consultation process for Free Schools is to promote the school proposal locally, to inform the local community as widely as possible of the detail of the proposal and to collect views from the local community to gauge support for the proposal. This consultation comprised of the quantitative and qualitative analysis of the outcomes of: · A series of consultation meetings; · Distribution of 5000 consultation documents to key stakeholders; · Responses by letter, and via the website – http://www.sandymoorschool.org.uk
The consultation process ran for a ten week period from Monday 16th January to Sunday 18th March 2012.
6 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
Section 2 Consultation Programme
Table 1 contains the details of the activities and the meetings that took place during the consultation period.
Table 1 Date Activity Venue and Time Numbers engaged January 16th Notice of consultation Facebook and Twitter No comments posted on social media received. sites January 16th Consultation www.sandymoor.org.uk 131 questionnaires questionnaire available completed. on website January 17th Emails to 98 businesses Invitations to the public No replies in direct on the DSIC site meeting to be held on the response to the site. invitation. January 20th Posters hung Sandymoor, Moore, 40 posters advertising the Public Daresbury, Appleton, Meeting. Windmill Hill, Norton.
January 23rd Article in local Runcorn & Widnes World Typical circulation of newspaper announcing 26,000 copies each the start of the week. consultation. January 24th Posters hung in Prominent locations 5 signposts Sandymoor P.C. around Sandymoor Parish. Noticeboards.
January 28th Public Meeting Daresbury Science & 100 attendees Innovation Centre - 1.00pm including potential pupils. February 1st Consultation leaflet Parish council members 50 leaflets distribution and local community groups. February 3rd Advert by the Parish Sandymoor and Norton Magazine Council in a local distribution to 2000 magazine local homes. February 8th Letters set to the local Maintained schools (6 Two responses: one authority (HBC) and Secondary, 20 Primary) and from the FE College local educational one FE college in the and one from a institutions borough of Halton secondary school. February 13th Consultation leaflet Nine local primary schools 400 leaflets distribution
7 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
February 27th to Consultation leaflet Sandymoor, Norton, 2000 local homes March 9th distribution Windmill Hill, Moore, Daresbury, Preston Brook March 1st Posters hung Sandymoor, Moore, 40 posters advertising the ‘Meet Daresbury, Appleton, the Headteacher’ Windmill Hill, Norton. Meeting. March 6th Drop-in Meeting Palacefields Primary School 7 parents 2.30pm March 14th ‘Meet the Headteacher‘ Sandymoor Hall 103 attendees public meeting 7.00pm
8 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
Section 3 Responses to the Consultation
3(a) Public consultation meetings Meeting 1 Daresbury Science and Innovation Campus, Runcorn - 1.00pm Saturday 28th January 2012
Present Proposer Group = 5 Partners = 2 Adults = 76 Children of school age = 22
Significant individuals: · Local Member of Parliament (MP) – Graham Evans · Halton Borough Council Councillors – John Bradshaw & Marjorie Bradshaw · Proposer Group Supporters - Colin Whitehouse & Anna Cooper (Education Adviser)
The meeting consisted of: 1. Welcome and the history of the Free School Application by Richard Eastburn (Chair – Proposer Group) 2. Welcome and introduction to the Centre by Professor Colin Whitehouse – Director of the DSIC 3. A presentation by Bryan Jones (Education Lead) which included · The Educational Vision · An explanation of the location option included in the consultation · An explanation of the schools Admissions Policy and oversubscription criteria · A presentation the public consultation questions 4. Invitation to the audience to ask questions.
Answers were provided by members of the Proposer Group to the following questions raised by members of the audience: · What is the meaning of the first question on the public consultation – Funding Agreement? · What cooperation is required from the local council in relation to the two sites? · Is Halton LA supporting the application for the school? · Transport links – what do you intend to do to enable pupils to attend the school? · Will there be improved road access to the sites? · What is the status of ‘Admissions being open’ in the context of no final decision having been made on the opening of the school? · What substantive changes could arise as outcomes of the statutory consultation process? · If you miss the September 2012 deadline for opening do you have to wait until September 2013?
9 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
· Could you say something about the temporary accommodation which is planned for use in the first year? Quality and location? · Provision of teaching staff – plan for their recruitment ready for the opening of the school? · When will the timetables for the other structures in the school e.g. Governors be decided? · Option of two school sites – does the local community have any say in this decision? · Which site do you (the proposer group) think is the best? · If you enter into the Funding Agreement with the Government what will be impact on other Halton LA schools? · Year 7 pupils – what will be the pupil/teacher ratio be in the school when it opens? · Will teachers have to teach several subjects during the first school year? · How many pupils from Halton currently go to secondary school in Warrington? · Oversubscription criteria – is there an element of unfairness in the order of their application? · How is all of the work the Proposer Group being paid for? Is this an issue? · Is there anything that local residents can do to help? · What are the estimated intake of the school and the final planned maximum size of the school? · Is distance from the school the most important factor? · Is the staffing plan published on the website yet? · What is the timescale for the recruitment of the headteacher and when will they start? · How does the rate of development of this school compare with the other 54 Free Schools which are being supported to opening in September 2012?
The Proposer Group made a closing request for all present to complete the consultation form and make their views known. Attendees were informed that admission application forms are available to take away.
Meeting 2 Drop-In meeting at Palacefields Primary School - 3.30pm Tuesday 6th March 2012
Present Proposer Group = 2 Adults = 7
The Proposer Group representatives presented the case for Sandymoor Free School to the parents of Year 6 pupils using the same presentation used in Meeting 1. They then responded to a range of questions posed by the parents relating to the structure and organisation of the school rather than any questioning the rationale or justification for its establishment. They sought information about the provision of school meals, transport to the school, school uniform and requested information about future events. The responses from the parents were supportive and keenly anticipating the opening of the school. One
10 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation parent was sufficiently impressed with the answers provided by the Proposer Group that she completed the application form requesting a Year 7 place for her child.
Meeting 3 ‘Meet the Headteacher’ meeting at Sandymoor Hall - 7.00pm Wednesday 14th March 2012
Present Proposer Group = 5 Headteacher Designate Adults = 91 (not all present for all of the meeting) Children of school age = 12
The Proposer Group ran a Question and Answer session for the first 30 minutes of this meeting. They responded to a range of questions relating to the organisation and operation of the school and only two which questioned the rationale or justification for its establishment. The Headteacher Designate then made a 20 minute presentation to the meeting outlining: · the educational vision · the progress with securing a suitable site · the planned structure and initial organisation of the school.
The Proposer Group and the Headteacher Designate then responded to further questions for a total of 15 minutes. These were wholly about the practical operation of the school, how it intends to secure a high quality education for the pupils given its initial size, the recruitment of staff and the provision of the permanent school buildings. Apart from a tiny minority the tone of all of the questioners was positive and supportive, seeking information about the ‘What?’ and ‘How?’ of the development of the school rather than ‘Why?’ and questioning its rationale or the motives of the Proposer Group in pursuing its proposal. The Proposer Group made a closing request for all present that had not done so, to complete the website consultation questionnaire and make their views known. Attendees were informed that admission application forms are available to take away.
11 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
3(b) Letters
As described in Section 2, letters informing them of the consultation were sent to all local educational institutions. This letter is included in this report in Appendix 3. Only two institutions replied to this letter.
1. The Principal of a local Academy made this single comment:
‘A funding agreement should not be entered into for a free school in Sandymoor. There are surplus places in good and outstanding Runcorn schools. There is no need for another school in Runcorn based in Sandymoor.’
2. The Vice Principal of a local Further Education college: a) Described the number of Year 7 places required in Runcorn and the number presently available; b) Provided date to demonstrate that the college is recognised nationally as a high performing institution; c) Explained the contribution the college had made to improvements in educational standards across the borough of Halton; d) Described the wide range of provision the college has in the locality.
The letter concluded by stating:
‘The College has sufficient places for current and future demand across the borough of Halton including Runcorn. The proposed post-16 Free School places are therefore surplus to the borough’s requirements and may destabilise existing providers of post-16 education. These include St. Chad’s and Ormiston Bolingbroke as well as Riverside College. The College cannot support developments that will directly undermine college-based post-16 provision in the borough of Halton. We do not believe the proposal to create significant new post-16 provision at Sandymoor Free School will prove to be in the interests of learners. We are particularly concerned that provision for the least able could be undermined.
12 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
3(c) Responses to the website questionnaire
A total of 131 people responded to the seven consultation questions via the school website – www.sandymoorschool.org.uk. The seven questions were those set out in the Consultation leaflet (see Appendix 2), 5000 of which were distributed to homes, businesses and organisation identified as stakeholders in the Stakeholder Consultation Strategy (see Appendix 1). Table 2 contains the summary of the responses to the seven consultation questions.
Table 2 Total number of responses to the website questionnaire = 131 Question Consultation Question Yes No Number Number of responses Number of responses % of responses % of responses 1 Should a funding agreement be entered 121 10 into so that we are able to set up the 92.4% 7.6% school? 2 Should the school have a specialism? 111 20 84.7% 15.3% 3 Does the educational vision meet the 118 13 expectations of a science and sport 90.0% 9.9% focussed secondary school? 4 Do you think that the educational plan will 118 13 deliver the results that you aspire to for 90.0% 9.9% your child? – please add comments 5 Is the admissions policy clear, fair and 125 6 unambiguous? 95.4% 4.6% 6 Do you think the age-range of the students 123 8 is appropriate? 93.9% 6.1% 7 Are you happy with the school being sited 119 12 within Sandymoor on one of the two sites? 90.8% 9.2%
Question 4 invited the respondents to add comments to support their response to that question. 79 of the respondents (60% of the total of 131) took the opportunity to make some additional comments. Sixty eight (86%) of these were in addition to the answer ‘Yes’ to question 4. These comments are all shown in Table 3. Eleven (14%) of these were in addition to the answer ‘No’ to question 4. These comments are all shown in Table 4.
At the end of the website consultation questionnaire respondents were invited to make any additional comments which they considered to be relevant. Sixty three (48% of the total of 131) respondents took the opportunity to make additional comments. Those which are broadly supportive of the Free School proposal are recorded in Table 5. Those which are opposed to the proposal are recorded in Table 6. Those which raised associated issues of concern are recorded in Table 7.
13 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
Table 3 Question 4 – Comments made in addition to a ‘Yes’ answer. 1 The plan appears to be appropriate and achievable. 2 I expect a High School I want to send my children to will create a safe and enriched educational environment, where my children will be motivated to learn. The Sandymoor Free School's vision completely embraces the expectations I have of a high quality secondary educational provider. I am in full support of the Sandymoor High School. 3 Yes, I particularly like the links with Daresbury Laboratories which will help drive a strong Science focus and give opportunities for more practical learning. 4 I would like to think so. 5 The educational plan is modern and 'future looking'. It will provide a sound basis for my child’s education and development. The key element is the science based curriculum that will provide the foundation for onward education and development. Students with strong 'science skills' will be required in 21st century Britain and in the wider world (the wider world will be increasingly driven by technology and our children must be equipped with the requisite skills). As such we fully support the vision. 6 Yes - local secondary schooling so important for child well-being, emotional security and transition allowing full access to a broad balanced curriculum with good focus on science and sport. Global citizenship a priority helping to shape adults who are employable and enterprising. 7 Yes - the aspirations I have for my children are clearly met by this plan. To note, I have concerns for the (frankly poor) schools in this area if this does not come to fruition. 8 The individual achievement approach should enable every learner to make the maximum progress, what more can a parent hope for. 9 Children need to be stimulated, and encouraged to develop to as high a level of achievement as they are capable. They need to be given appropriate opportunities and the educational plan would appear to fulfil these needs. 10 Yes I believe the plan is excellent and I have no doubt will be reviewed in order to keep it at the highest standard. 11 Yes, at present it looks well thought out. 12 Yes, very much. The link with DSIC is unique in the UK, so proximity as well as University links are vital to the rounded education of my children. The rounded curriculum and vision is admirable and worthy of strong and unadulterated support. 13 Yes, I particularly like the idea of the IEP, this would hopefully give the children more chance to succeed in the areas they are deemed to be best at. 14 I believe the educational plan presented today will support my daughter in her academic qualifications. 15 Yes, we would like to see more details in due course. 16 Yes they are very good with consideration for developing the whole child and not simply ticking boxes. 17 Yes. I think this will depend on the level of expertise you employ. 18 Yes - the plan looks very good. 19 Yes, although I would want to ensure that the specialism in Science was adequately backed up by a detailed level of Mathematics 20 Yes as long as all aspects of the curriculum are covered. 21 Yes, this is an exceptional opportunity, not to be missed 22 I feel the educational plan has been explained clearly and concisely. If this is delivered as proposed I feel my daughter will reap the benefits of attending such a school. 23 The educational plan will only deliver results if you have the staff to inspire the children. If the school delivers as good as the public consultation the sky is the limit for those children who are keen to learn. 24 Yes, I like the idea of a free school where the classes are of mixed ability where the choice is given on what is taught.
14 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
25 Yes very much so and will clearly nurture her development 26 Yes, especially if they are accredited to the British Dyslexia Association. 27 The educational plan looks to be robust and hopefully will make the school very successful. It looks like it will deliver good levels of results though ensuring children have good support around them. 28 Yes. I believe the plan has been well thought out and contains relevant details. 29 Yes I do think that it will deliver the results for my children. 30 Yes. I think it is very well thought and especially pleased about the links to industry and parents involvement aspects. 31 Yes - these closely match the aspirations we have for our children’s education. 32 Yes. The plan seems to provide a better (much needed) approach which aligns education more closely with the "Real Business World" and would provide stimulus to children of all abilities. 33 Yes. The school will offer the usual National Curriculum and then utilise the local, exciting facilities to specialise in Science and sport. With the local businesses, innovators with leading science and sports team in the Daresbury, Warrington, Widnes and north west area it is excellent that these local resources can be utilised. 34 Yes - the Educational Plan is well thought out and clear, aspiring to ensure that all children regardless of ability will progress and reach their potential. 35 The plans are excellent and far exceed what is available in Runcorn currently. 36 Yes: currently both my children are privately educated due to the woeful provision of local schools. I will enrol both children following attending the meeting at Daresbury. 37 Yes - a school providing excellent facilities, curriculum and teaching in the local area. 38 Yes, I'm very happy with the Science, Sport and Enterprise specialism 39 Looks good but no expert 40 Links with Daresbury Labs and all the other local businesses etc. mentioned is strongly welcomed. Individualise learning plans etc. welcomed too. Overall, the role of parents and the extent of their involvement/control need to be very carefully managed. Close adherence to the views & experience of the new headteacher and senior staff should be made, in this context. There should be a ban on pit bull type dogs - and those dogs banned under Dangerous Dogs legislation - at school gates/premises. 41 Yes I am interested in a curriculum that offers traditional and vocational learning opportunities for children and encourages enterprise and active learning. 42 I would expect it to meet those standards 43 Yes, this is an amazing opportunity! 44 Yes, the prospects in this school will be fantastic! The specialist subjects are unique and innovative. 45 I think it will certainly deliver the results I aspire for my Grandchildren 46 WELL IT ALL SOUNDS GOOD AND I THINK IT'S AMAZING WHAT'S BEEN ACHIEVED THUS FAR. 47 Absolutely. We believe our children's needs will be met by the broad based plan that has been outlined by the committee. Key life skills and specialist subjects are of particular interest to us. 48 Yes, plan sounds amazing and, my only concerns is that it is not achieved and ends up being 'just another' school but with the right staff it will provide an amazing environment for learning 49 Yes - I believe whole heartedly that the school will provide everything I aspire to for my children. 50 Yes- the proposed science speciality would be of great interest to my children. 51 I support the educational plan 52 I am replying as the borough councillor for Sandymoor who supports the free school. I have no children of an age to take advantage of it, but do believe it will deliver not only the results, but the other outcomes aimed for also. 53 I think it will deliver the results. I am answering this as Halton Councillor for Sandymoor, not as a parent (children too old). 54 Apart from being good for Sandymoor as a community and local for the children, this school is ideal for my children to focus on the three subjects that are most likely to prove reliable in the future for employment.
15 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
55 Yes, current provision for secondary education with in Halton is not sufficient. 56 The school plan, if delivered, will provide my children with a well-balanced education (including recreational activity). I believe it is a very good idea to focus on a small number of specialist areas, to be delivered alongside the mainstream (Maths, English, Languages etc.), as this will provide my children with a very strong academic background to take into the adult work environment. Well done to all involved. 57 I have been in awe of the proposals and plans and am thrilled my child may have the opportunity to benefit from them 58 Yes - most definitely 59 I am impressed with the plan and from the information I have seen I am highly confident that it will deliver what I am looking for my child. 60 Having looked at the plans Yes I believe this will be the perfect solution to schooling in Sandymoor and Norton. 61 Yes - The strength in the school is in the education of each child to respect their neighbourhood. The fact that the school intends to rewards good behaviour is most definitely the right approach. Long term, I can only see the school being a positive acquisition for Sandymoor and the surrounding area. 62 Yes, this school will deliver the education that I wish for my 2 grandchildren who live in Sandymoor. 63 As a former teacher I agree that this school will absolutely deliver the education that I expect for my 2 grandchildren who live in Sandymoor. 64 Yes, we want our children to achieve the best to their abilities. The proposals made would seek to do that. 65 Yes, we want our children to achieve the best out of their education and the proposals seek to offer them a school that gives them an all rounded education to set them up for the future. 66 Yes. I believe the educational plans and ethics are positive ones that will benefit the children. 67 Absolutely!! It is very innovative and I will definitely be sending my children to the school. Whoever wrote it deserves a medal!! 68 As a parent of two children who will be going to this school, it is an excellent educational plan.
16 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
Table 4 Question 4 – Comments made in addition to a ‘No’ answer. 1 In part, I would prefer the school to have a selective admissions policy based upon an entrance exam and that the school have closer links to a university or Daresbury Labs. 2 I'm sure funding will not be sufficient for the 'plan' in these economic times. 3 Do not need a school in the estate, should be outside the housing area. 4 No - I have a child in Year 6 and will not be considering Sandymoor for her education as I want to ensure she gets a proven education, not pie in the sky ideas. I have attended presentations from local schools and they all show me exactly what my daughter will be doing next year from subjects to trips to visiting other countries, we have met the teachers, counsellors etc. seen the sports facilities, the superb science labs, language labs, IT Labs. All you can show me is words about getting someone from Everton FC to run a football course, or having a trip to Daresbury labs - Any existing school does all you are proposing and much more. Also, I do not believe that by my daughter being in a form year potentially containing only half a dozen members will be any good to her at all - Her year will never have enough members to form any sport teams, she will not experience the different environments provided at a real school, the socialism provided in the hall and the canteen, the well fitted libraries etc. 2 or 3 years down the line will be too late. You cannot begin to compete with the very good established schools for at least 6 or 7 years and I think this is seriously going to affect your intake. Other potential worrying issues are a change in government which could affect funding and also the way the economy is going, the additional planned housing for Sandymoor is going to keep being put back. There are more than enough school places in Runcorn, Sandymoor won’t be able to sustain its own school for years therefore you will be taking kids and therefore money from existing schools. To have such an excess of staff for the first few years when there are no kids is a blatant waste of money that should be being used elsewhere. There seems to be a distinct lack of interest and therefore real need for this project otherwise there would be hundreds at the meetings and sending in admissions forms. Instead there are a few parents with a vested interest begging people to fill in admissions forms even if we don't want a space as it makes the numbers look good!!! Very poor. PS We are desperately trying to control the amount of social networking on the web that are kids access - to suggest you will be using it for lessons and as a communication tool is a very bad idea. 5 The school should NOT have a science and sports focus. Not all children and young persons can benefit from these just two points of focus. Music is just as important as Science, especially the playing of instruments in a team. All talents should be nurtured and developed. 6 I think the specialisms are limited and will not meet the aspirations and requirements of the wider business markets and the need for children to balance their intellectual, physical and creative efforts with the proposed curriculum. The school should be aiming for a standard of academic excellence and opportunities more in line with that offered by the best private schools than attempting to deliver a siloed curriculum. For example: Drama - gives confidence, and teaches the ability to listen and hold people’s attention. Essential for potential leaders; Arts - Allows for creative expression and more lateral and agile ways of thinking; Biology - why not aim to deliver the AQA - where are you preparing the pupils to excel? Where are the science Olympiads? Ditto Chemistry and Physics; Economics - young enterprise programmes?? English - Are you going to offer both English Language and English Literature as distinct subjects; History - what has happened to History on the curriculum. How do you expect pupils to know where they are going, if they do not have a sound appreciation and knowledge of the past; Mathematics - IGCSE, Additional Mathematics, Mechanics, Statistics. Why aren't you aiming to get all pupils to aspire and take Mathematics at a higher level? Where are your targets for attainment? Shouldn't this be far higher than that offered within Halton currently (which is why I have always sent my children out of borough); Languages - How about Mandarin and Urdu, with development and expanding markets, these languages
17 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
ought to be considered as core subjects, just as French, Spanish and German may be; Careers Advice - why not bring this in from the age of 11, so children have a chance to start to scope and refine their experiences and skills, in line with future careers well before they are at the stage of applying for Universities in the UK or abroad. I realise that the school is just starting out, but at this stage, I could not consider sending any of my children here with such limited opportunities open to them. 7 No - lack of road infrastructure - will not be enough pupils In Sandymoor - taking money away from State Schools - temporary accommodation not satisfactory- invites vandalism- Teenagers wandering around area at lunchtimes with nowhere to go + nowhere for pupils to go to purchase lunch--nothing mentioned about food facilities - most teenagers do not participate in school meals - Walking to school? Not possible for surrounding areas - not good local transport links. 8 Not sure yet - but have been to the public consultation event, and feel confident that it is better than other current options for secondary education in this area. 9 I do not support this school being built in the residential area of Sandymoor for the reasons set out below. 10 My own child would require more of an emphasis on literature and English/literacy primarily and the arts in a wider sense. I am not entirely sure that the school should be aiming for a particular specialism given the need in this area for a high school to provide a quality broad based education which people are currently finding in Warrington and Helsby to name two. I am concerned that by specialising the school may not be geared to fill the current vacuum and that it will serve to attract students from outside the area who are looking at these subjects, leaving locals whose children do not fit into these two boxes, having to still venture elsewhere. All of which seems a shame and a missed opportunity. If the school progresses by specialising, I agree with the logical specialism in science and technology, given the proximity to Daresbury SIC. However I do question the inclusion of sport, given that; a) Given the impression of an 'easy option' and attract those looking for that in education; b) Proposals do not appear to provide for specialist facilities; c) Future facilities provided in the area shown on green space will need to address the concerns and potential objections of the Environment Agency; d) All future pitches provided in the area shown will need to be fully accessed by the wider public to overcome conflict with the Sandymoor SPD and I do not see how this can be successfully achieved; e) Based on these specialisms would the school be creating a structural bias towards attracting more boys than girls? 11 No. As an ex teacher I object to the focus on Science and Sports. Having looked at the curriculum I find it narrowly focussed. I note that the persons setting up the school all come from IT, business and scientific backgrounds and feel that this has skewed their vision. What if my child is interested in history, philosophy and arts? I feel that the curriculum is primarily aimed at developing business and IT skills but what about children who don't want to do this? I am concerned that I would need to send my child to a different Key Stage 4 or Key Stage 5 school on the basis of the curriculum. I also object to the fact that French won't be taught.
18 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
Table 5 Comments which are supportive of the Free School proposal 1 At last, a local secondary school making use of resources in our area. 2 Either site is fine, although I feel the second option is actually preferable as it brings the facilities closer to the sports area and I think this would be more beneficial. 3 Having the school within walking distance of housing will be safer, greener, cost effective, allowing parents to get to work without worrying about child care issues. Having the Primary school adjacent to the High school is ideal too. 4 Yes, Sandymoor definitely needs a school(s) as children within the community have to travel to schools outside of the area during busy times of the day. I feel with the growing population of Sandymoor there must be a need for local schools - both primary and secondary. 5 Has to be Site B - safer, campus feel and very community facing. Fragmentation will create challenges that needn't be there! 6 Absolutely, Sandymoor has needed a school for a long time! The GOOD schools in the surrounding area are normally oversubscribed, leaving parents with limited choices of schools they are not happy sending their child to. I personally would move out of the area rather than send my child to a school which I feel is unsuitable. 7 My personal preference would be site B; however I would fully support either location. I feel the school will succeed due to the passion of the steering group leading the proposal. 8 I am very positive about the school and the holistic benefits the school will bring to the whole community. 9 Site B is better for the children as everything is side by side. 10 Prefer Site B. 11 Prefer site near Sandymoor Hall, easier access etc. 12 I am very excited at the prospect of this new school. Up until now I had grave concerns as to what school I would send my daughter to, having not originated from the area and not having particularly good feedback on other schools within Halton. My daughter is currently in Year 4 at St Bertelines and doing very well. Therefore, I sincerely hope she will be able to attend Sandymoor School and reap the benefits it so clearly aims to provide. 13 Yes but as I live on Malmesbury Park, I would prefer the site next to the proposed sports facilities rather than next to where I live. 14 My children are not due to start secondary school for another few years but as a Sandymoor resident I believe this school would be a great new learning opportunity for my children as well as others when they are due to start. I think this will also provide us with a better local community within Sandymoor and other local areas. 15 Preference of Plan 'B' 16 Plan 'b' preferred 17 Near Sandymoor Hall is better. 18 I am delighted that the school is been developed in this way. Sandymoor is a large area and requires a high school of good quality. Hopefully this will prevent parents from having to consider leaving the area to send their children to a quality high school. My Husband and I will support the opening of this school. 19 Plan 'b' 20 Site B would be preferable as would be better to have sports facilities close to main school buildings. 21 In my opinion the site where the school does NOT use the land currently proposed for a future primary school is the better approach. 22 I think that site plan looks great and would prefer for the two areas to be together rather than on the proposed primary school site. 23 Not on site A as not safe due to road (Pitts Heath Lane) being too minor to accommodate the traffic for a secondary school site. Also, there are swans/cygnets that regularly cross this road/walk up and down this road - site B would be acceptable.
19 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
24 My preference would be Site B... 25 Preference is plan B. 26 My preference is plan B having the sites close together. 27 Seems a bit cramped on site A and suggest site B better if there was an underpass (or maybe pedestrian bridge) from school over road to playing fields. 28 Preference for the site which is more condensed of the two. 29 Yes, it definitely needs to be in Sandymoor 30 Prefer site without primary school. 31 1) Happy with either of the sites on condition that any conflict with the Sandymoor SPD is overcome and that the Environment Agency does not object. The school should work to ensure (not just promote) sustainable transportation and this could be part of the entrepreurial objectives discussed in the plan. 2) Please see above re specialisms. 3) The acceptance of the initial intake does need careful management given the sibling allowances which will be available further down the line. 4) Can the clause relating to previous excluded children be tightened to accept children who have been excluded from one school rather than two? 5) The involvement of parents is welcomed, but needs to be rigidly managed and clear behavioural policy established. For example; banning use of bad language on school premises; banning of dogs on school premises; whistle blowing/reporting procedures for poor behaviour of parents on school premises. Sorry, but in my experience, it is very often the parents, rather than the children who need the most chastising. 6) If a specialism in sport is taken forward, there is an opportunity to develop much needed facilities which the wider community could use and again, help future funding. E.g. Is there scope for a fully equipped commercial scale of gym and sports halls, sauna and spa. 32 Fantastic opportunity for Sandymoor and surrounding areas to have a secondary school which has great aspirations. In addition it will help generate financial growth in the area. 33 Although we are grandparents approaching retirement. Our Grandchildren will attend the School and we are delighted it is going ahead. It will be an excellent school which will serve Sandymoor and the surrounding area very well indeed. It will also reduce the amount and length of car journeys as most children from Sandymoor will be able to walk or cycle safely to school along footpaths without the need to go on main roads 34 Site B made more sense and I understand has now been approved. 35 I welcome the addition of a secondary school on Sandymoor. I much prefer the idea of my children walking to school instead of having to leave for school ridiculously early in the morning to catch a bus. 36 Great for all the children to be able to walk together to school. 37 The site NOT reserved for a Primary School is preferred 38 Final site settled on is best. 39 Site b. 40 I believe as a community it will launch Sandymoor into the next phase. By having a Secondary School (and when Halton BC get their act together, a Primary School), it will give a safer choice for the children of Sandymoor, as they will be able to safely walk to and from school. The school will also provide a boost to the stagnant housing market in the area, as well as helping to improve the local businesses; by having experts wanting to move into the area that has an excellent school for their children. 41 Very needed addition to the community of Sandymoor. 42 A well needed addition proposed by a very dedicated inspiring group. 43 This is ideal as it will allow children to walk to school reducing carbon emissions. 44 I believe that Sandymoor school will provide additional choice and will benefit the local area. I believe that further local planning developments would subsequently occur that would most definitely be good for Sandymoor area; this would benefit the community as a whole. 45 This is a fantastic opportunity for both Sandymoor and East Runcorn to improve educational standards for all children. 46 Yes. Positive for the community of Sandymoor.
20 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
Table 6 Comments which are opposed to the Free School proposal 1 There is no need for a secondary school, the other two schools are under subscribed and families get smaller every year. Survey each household in Sandymoor for their opinion and if they actually have children to send. E.g. out of 21 households on my street only 6 have children of a school age... NO NEED FOR YET ANOTHER SCHOOL. Moore Juniors is excellent so no requirement for infant or juniors and older children can travel to the other 2 mainstream secondary schools easily. 2 There is no need for a further development in Sandymoor of any housing or Schools the green band that was left is disappearing. The wild life is being pushed further away and the Buzzards that were here have already gone. As for the school WHY is it needed when the two Runcorn Schools are not running at full capacity nor are they expecting to. This is a time when we are cutting back on public spending and we should be directing our funding into areas that need it. 3 I do not agree that Sandymoor needs a senior school 4 Why does Sandymoor need a school? The through traffic due additional developments at the Science park is enough without adding to it by building a new school which is not needed. There are enough schools in the local area as it is. It would appear that the proposed sites take up green land and some wooded areas. The ideal of moving and living in a semi-rural area is being destroyed by continual building and granting of building sites by HBC. 5 There does not appear to be a justifiable business model/need for this school, there are places in local schools still to be filled. As a tax payer, I am concerned that in times of financial hardship this has been given the green light. This seems to have been driven pure and simply by snobbery. Some parents in Sandymoor do not want to send their children to Runcorn schools for all the wrong reasons as they are actually performing well. Further, parents seem to object to having to move to get their children into a Stockton Heath School. Education has always been a postcode lottery, just as the health service is. This is not a problem unique to Sandymoor. For those parents to expect a high school to come to them, rather than they move nearer to another school is unfair on all the other residents in Sandymoor. In respect of the proposal to build it in the quiet, low crime residential area of Sandymoor, I am deeply concerned. Bringing hundreds of teenagers into the area will bring trouble to the neighbourhood and will bring down what is currently a quiet and pleasant place to live. Residents such as me bought their homes on the basis of a small primary school not a high school in its community. I do not support the school and make this submission as both a resident and as a Sandymoor Parish Councillor. 6 No I am strongly against the positioning of this school in either place. What you haven't considered is that Newmoore Lane is becoming an extremely busy road and is one of the two main roads with houses directly on it. Extending Wharford Lane will only increase traffic and will cause more noise and danger for the families living around there. I did not move here to have a secondary school forced upon my doorstep. Sure the school is a fabulous idea but needs to be positioned further from the established housing. Why not use the site that Ormiston Bollingbrook Academy was pursuing? Extend a pathway through to Daresbury? Sorry! 7 The structure of this questionnaire is unusual - for instance, if answering "No" to the question of whether a funding agreement, several other questions (such as "Should the school have a specialism") should at least allow N/A as a response. My principal objection is on the admissions policy, further to which the question "Is the admissions policy clear, fair and unambiguous", is manifestly three questions - or, at the very least, two. Fairness and clarity are completely different. Given Sandymoor's position as a very affluent area surrounded by areas of substantial socio-economic deprivation, combined with apparent dissatisfaction with alterative school provision, I would have thought it would be a priority when opening new school to offer places to everyone who would otherwise have to attend the alternatives. I have seen no evidence that this will be the case. Given the comparative socio-economic circumstances of Sandymoor with the surrounding areas, I think higher ranking clauses such as "Household income less than 75% of the national average" should override the "distance from the school" criteria. In the absence of such clauses, provision of the school merely perpetuates the age old problem of people seeking to live in the catchment area, and
21 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation extends the ghettoization of the socio-economically less fortunate (which in turn, perpetuates their life situation). I find this profoundly objectionable and wrong in this day and age.
22 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
Table 7 Comments which raise issues associated with the Free School proposal Proposed Site 1 It would have been better if more wooded landscaping could be provided to afford the children a sense of being surrounded by a thick belt of mixed woodland. Impact on the local community 1 This school would only really appeal to Sandymoor parents- roads will end up congested as there will always be people who drop the children off in cars and would obstruct roads and be a danger to walking pupils - plus temporary school buildings will be prone to vandalism just like the park and no local police station - bus service from other areas non-existent for the proposal to offer places to surrounding areas. A lot of people moved to Sandymoor for the peace and quiet - this project will need more funding than it will get and would rather see it used in an established school so they can specialise. 2 Age range - Although the age range for a high school is appropriate, given the out of borough drift when Moore and Daresbury Primary schools have been oversubscribed I would have like to have seen the proposal be for an all through 4 - 19 school. Site - I feel that site B is a more appropriate location for the school building, based on the proposed sports facilities. Although site A is only a few hundred metres further away, this could have safeguarding and therefore cost implications when students go for a PE / Sports lesson. On site A there would be too much public land in between the build and the sports facilities. Where this happens in existing school, extra gates and bridges have had to be built to safeguard the students during school time. However, I also feel that neither site is big enough to accommodate a primary, secondary and 6th Form building without being out of character for the area. The proposal seems very dense and if this has to be the case then maybe the buildings should be combined together with 'wings' for each age range. Failing this I think the primary site should be retained on site A with the high school on site B. Added to this - whatever is built on site A, I would hope that the strip of trees immediately behind the gardens of houses on Malmesbury Park should be retained. 3 I am very concerned about the proposed school site being on the designated primary school site. This land is directly behind my property and although the proposal for a primary school was on the plans when we purchased in Sandymoor and we were fully aware of this, we did not expect the land to be used for a high school. I believe this would impact on my property and I strongly object to this proposed change. 4 The present proposals using existing roads will create additional transport problems for the local residents. Local residents have not been consulted and we are extremely concerned that the woodland off Wharford Lane is already being cut down!! What about the woodpeckers, small birds, bats and owls that use this wood! Conservation is not being taken into consideration. Roads and Traffic 1 Whichever site you choose, as the majority of kids will be coming from out of the Sandymoor area then traffic is going to be a nightmare. This will cause major problems for Sandymoor residents trying to access the two primary schools. And not that it matters to me but have the residents of Sandymoor that don’t have kids of high school age been consulted? None of them know anything about it and when it has been mentioned they are totally against it and will protest against either site. 2 I would be concerned by the road links for Site B as they to pass through the more minor roads of Sandymoor. 3 Bad road infrastructure - teenagers at age to drive when attending sixth form - no proposals shown for car parking area !!!!!!!! Local roads will end up grid locked + young drivers are well known for speed and no local police station and no local bobbies to police areas- one of the sites too close to the road. 4 I live on Newmoore Lane and bought the house 5 years ago on the basis the area was quiet and didn't have kids hanging around. There were no proposals for a school as we enquired with the council before buying the house. Newmoore Lane already has a lot of traffic and I have already had to contact the council with regards to the vibrations on my house caused by passing buses, lorries etc. More traffic will simply cause more vibrations to these properties in this area. Pictures rock on the walls when traffic is passing, which is
23 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
worrying enough as it is. The utility grids on the roads (Pitts Heath Lane, Newmoore Lane) have had to be repaired numerous times, especially since Swans Reach has been built, because of the increase in traffic and its impact on the road surfaces, so this proposal is ridiculous given the roads here are not simply built to accommodate this amount of traffic. Also, we have previously contacted the police with regards to the fact that some drivers seem to think Pitts Heath Lane, Wharford Lane and Newmoore Lane are Formula One racing tracks. They speed around here and take the corner from Wharford Lane onto Newmoore Lane almost on two wheels. It is a matter of time before someone gets hurt by these boy racers. My other concern is that we have a lot of wildlife in the area including bats and owls - both of which I have seen in my own garden and so I know they are living in the woodlands on Wharford Lane. To disturb the environment of protected species would be morally wrong, and I will be contacting the Bats Conservation Trust about this. There are plenty of good schools in Runcorn, all of which are on the bus route and so I do not feel the need for another one. Admissions 1 I would be concerned that a child who does not excel at sport or science would be excluded from their local high school and have to travel out of Sandymoor to attend school. Would children not resident in Sandymoor but with a particular interest in science and sport be able to apply?
24 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
Section 4 Analysis of the Consultation Responses
The public meeting held on Saturday 28th January was widely publicised by the Proposer Group and 100 individuals attended. This included several family groups of parents and prospective school pupils. The overall tenor of the meeting was very supportive of the Sandymoor Free School proposal and, as the questions posed by the audience demonstrate, there was an over-ridding desire to obtain more information about the intended mode of operation of the school rather than raising objections to it being established.
The Drop-In meeting held on Tuesday 6th March was attended by a small number of parents of Year 6 pupils in a local primary school. Again the overall tenor of the meeting was very supportive of the Sandymoor Free School proposal; the questions posed by the parents demonstrated an over-ridding desire to obtain more information about the operation of the school with one parent being so impressed with what she had heard that she completed an admission application for her child.
The ‘Meet the Headteacher’ meeting held on Wednesday 14th March was widely publicised by the Proposer Group and 103 individuals attended. This included a few family groups of parents and prospective school pupils. Once again the tenor of the meeting was very supportive of the Sandymoor Free School proposal and welcomed the additional detail provided by the Headteacher Designate. Whilst not universally so, the questions posed by the audience demonstrated, there was a predominant theme of support for the school and the desire to obtain more information about its planned organisation and operation rather than questioning the rationale for, or raising objections to, the proposal.
The letter (see Appendix 3) sent to the local authority (Halton Borough Council) and local education institutions canvassing their views on the proposal contained brief details of the Sandymoor Free School proposal (see Appendix 4) and the seven consultation questions (see Appendix 2). In this instance respondents were invited to provide any written comments to the Chair of the Project Steering Group or respond via the website questionnaire. Only two institutions responded. One was a local Academy and the other a local Further Education college. Neither was supportive of the proposal to establish Sandymoor Free School. The Academy contended that there was no need for another school in Runcorn due to the current availability of surplus places in good and outstanding schools. The college made a specific point also relating to the availability of sufficient places for Year 7 pupils in local secondary schools and emphasised its contribution to the local success in improving educational outcomes for learners by the age of 19 and the range of provision it has for this group of learners.
The 5000 Consultation Leaflets were distributed as set out in Section 2. They contained brief details of the Sandymoor Free School proposal (Appendix 4) as well as setting out the seven stakeholder consultation questions (Appendix 2). In many consultation exercises the leaflet provides a postage paid response sheet. This was not the case in this process. Respondents were directed to the consultation questionnaire available at the school website –
25 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
www.sandymoorschool.org.uk. One hundred and thirty one responses were received to the seven consultation questions via the website.
The quantitative summary of the answers to the website questionnaire are shown on page 13 and demonstrate overwhelming support for the Sandymoor Free School proposal. This table if followed by the text of the additional comments organised into several categories. In question 4 respondents were invited to provide additional information to substantiate their answer to the question. Of the 131 respondents, 79 (60%) provided additional information in support of the answer they gave. The extent and relative size of these groups is summarised in Table 8.
At the end of the website questionnaire respondents were provided with the opportunity to record any other comments they felt they would like to make. Of the 131 respondents, 63 (48%) took the opportunity to record additional comments. These were categorised into those generally supportive of the proposal, those opposed to the proposal and those which raise other associated issues. The extent and relative size of each of these groups is summarised in Table 9.
Table 8 Summary of the numbers of additional comments relating to Question 4 Answer Number of Number providing additional Number providing additional responses comments to support their comments to support their % of responses answer. answer. % of all respondents (131) % of this response Yes 118 68 68 90% 52% 57.6% (68 of 118) No 13 11 11 9.9% 8.3% 84.6% (11 of 13)
Table 9 Summary of the nature of the additional comments made by respondents. Answer Number providing additional Number providing additional comments. comments. % of all respondents (131) % of those providing additional comments (63) Supportive 46 46 35% 73% Opposed 7 7 5.3% 11.1% Raised associated issues 11 11 8.3% 17.4%
Data on page 13 and in Tables 8 and 9 shows that: · 92.4% of respondents agree that a funding agreement should be entered into so that the school can be set up;
26 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
· 84.7% of respondents agree that the school should have a specialism; · 90% of respondents agree that the educational vision for the school meet the expectations of one with a sport and science focus; · 90% of the respondents believe that the education plan for Sandymoor Free School (Question 4) will deliver the results that they aspire to for their children; · 95.4% of respondents agree that the admissions policy is clear, fair and unambiguous; · 93.9% of respondents agree that the age range of the students is appropriate; · 93.9% of respondents are happy with the school being sited within Sandymoor on one of the two proposed sites; · 52% of all respondents added comments to the questionnaire in support of their ‘Yes’ answer to question 4; · 84.6% of the small number of respondents (13) who answered ‘No’ to question 4 provided additional comments to support their answer; · 35% of all respondents made additional comments to the questionnaire which were supportive of the Sandymoor Free School proposal; · 5.3% of all respondents made additional comments to the questionnaire which were opposed to the Sandymoor Free School proposal; · 73% of all those making additional comments to the questionnaire were supportive of the Sandymoor Free School proposal; · Only 11.1% of all those making additional comment to the questionnaire were opposed to the Sandymoor Free School proposal.
27 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
Section 5 Summary of Consultation Outcomes
Given the number of consultation leaflets distributed and the number of organisation provide with information about the Sandymoor Free School proposal the response rate was very low. Only 133 responses were received from the distribution of 5000 consultation leaflets. That is a response rate of 2.66%.
With 131 respondents the website questionnaire was the most productive mechanism by which local people provided their opinions about and support for, or opposition to the Sandymoor Free School proposal.
Opposition to the proposal was expressed by the senior leaders of two local education institutions on the basis of the provision of additional secondary school places when sufficient already exist and additional opportunities for post-16 students where current provision has raised standards in Halton already. There was also opposition from a small number of respondents questioning the need for another secondary school in Runcorn and its location in Sandymoor. Other respondents, who are residents in the locality of the proposed site in Sandymoor, expressed concern about the schools impact on the local environment, the loss of the rural nature of the village and the increase in traffic on local roads.
However, the vast and overwhelming majority of respondents to this consultation support the Sandymoor Free School proposal. Their enthusiasm for the proposal and the impact it could have on the local community are exemplified by the following comments from the website questionnaires:
‘I expect a High School I want to send my children to will create a safe and enriched educational environment, where my children will be motivated to learn. The Sandymoor Free School's vision completely embraces the expectations I have of a high quality secondary educational provider. I am in full support of the Sandymoor High School.’
‘I am very excited at the prospect of this new school. Up until now I had grave concerns as to what school I would send my daughter to, having not originated from the area and not having particularly good feedback on other schools within Halton. My daughter is currently in Year 4 at St Bertelines and doing very well. Therefore, I sincerely hope she will be able to attend Sandymoor School and reap the benefits it so clearly aims to provide.’
‘I believe as a community it will launch Sandymoor into the next phase. By having a Secondary School (and when Halton BC get their act together, a Primary School), it will give a safer choice for the children of Sandymoor, as they will be able to safely walk to and from school. The school will also provide a boost to the stagnant housing market in the area, as well as helping to improve the local businesses; by having experts wanting to move into the area that has an excellent school for their children.’
28 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
Appendix 1 – Stakeholder Consultation Strategy
In order to comply with the statutory regulations in force (Section 10 of the Academies Act 2010) we (The Proposer Group) will engage with the groups listed under the consultees list as to whether a Funding Agreement should be entered into for the purpose of opening the proposed school. We will provide a summary of the following information in the consultation document outlining the school: · an outline of the school size. · a summary detail surrounding the vision and educational plan of the school. · specific attention will also be drawn to the first few years where we will address concerns parents may have in sending their children to a school with unknown results. · outline the vision for the learning environment that will be the backbone on which the school’s future success will be built. · details of the links with the Daresbury Science and Innovation Campus and other local enterprises. · details of the admissions procedure and over-subscription criteria. · the proposal for the school site and temporary accommodation as appropriate.
We propose to use a brochure-based document including some pictures to show reference to the type of school and temporary buildings as appropriate.
The Consultees 1. Parents. 2. Local primary schools that were approached during the demand phase. 3. Local pre-school groups. 4. The Local Authority. 5. The Local Education Department. 6. Neighbouring Local Authorities – in Warrington, Cheshire East and Cheshire West & Chester. 7. The Daresbury Science and Innovation Campus. 8. The four local Parish Councils; Moore, Sandymoor, Daresbury and Preston Brook. 9. Sandymoor Community Association. 10. Nearby Secondary Schools including The Heath, Ormiston Bolingbroke Academy, The Grange, St Chads and Bridgewater. 11. Community groups - encompassing groups outside the immediate vicinity. 12. Local businesses. 13. Local Sports Groups (e.g. football team). 14. As wide a demographic as possible using the marketing strategy below.
Marketing the Consultation · Initially we will use the email distribution list that we have generated during the demand phase to send out electronic copies of the consultation and asking for people to reply with their address if they would like a paper copy of the document.
29 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
· We will also promote the school’s consultation in a number of local shops, supermarkets and shopping centres to involve as many people from the wider community as possible. · Copies of the consultation will also be delivered with the distribution of a local magazine which reaches 2,500 local homes. · Jointly with the local primary schools, we will arrange for the consultation document to be sent home to parents. · We would host a number of consultation evenings coupled with a presentation of the proposals at the key primary schools and through the local community groups. · With the local press as an update on the progress · We will develop our website so that it contains more in depth information and our plan is to have an interactive consultation document on the website.
Suggested Questions & Timescale The last page of the consultation document will be detachable and can be returned by post (with the address on the reverse). The questions listed with space for responses will be, but not limited to: · Should a funding agreement be entered into to set up this school? · Should the school have a specialism? · Does the educational vision meet the expectations of a science and sports focussed secondary school · Do you think that the educational plan will deliver the results that you aspire to for your child? – Please add any comments. · Is the admissions policy clear, fair and unambiguous? · Do you think the age-range of students is appropriate? · Are you happy with the proposed location?
The consultation period will last for 10 weeks.
Responding To Questions All responses would be acknowledged within 48 hours stating that all the responses would be reviewed at the end of the consultation period. The responses would be categorised (e.g. admissions, educational vision, education plan etc.) and each area reviewed by the steering group to ensure that full consideration is given to each point. We will look to encompass points that will enhance the offering, potential student numbers and uptake in the wider community.
30 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
Appendix 2 – Stakeholder Consultation Questions
Question Consultation Question Number 1 Should a funding agreement be entered into so that we are able to set up this school?
2 Should the school have a specialism?
3 Does the educational vision meet the expectations of a science and sports focussed secondary school?
4 Do you think that the educational plan will deliver the results that you aspire to for your child? – Please add any comments.
5 Is the admissions policy clear, fair and unambiguous?
6 Do you think the age-range of students is appropriate?
7 Are you happy with the school being sited within Sandymoor on one of the two sites?
Please add any further comments.
31 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
Appendix 3 – Stakeholder Consultation Letter
8th February 2012
Free School in Sandymoor
Dear
As you may already know, our proposed secondary school for Sandymoor has progressed to the pre- opening phase and we are required to undertake a public consultation. Enclosed is a copy of our consultation brief and we would appreciate any comments that you may have. The full document can be found on our website with an electronic form to complete should you feel it appropriate. www.sandymoorschool.org.uk
The public consultation will end on the 18th March and all responses will need to be received by then.
Yours faithfully
Richard Eastburn Chair, Sandymoor School Project Steering Group
32 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
Appendix 4 – Stakeholder Consultation Leaflet Text
33 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Sandymoor Free School – Stakeholder Consultation
34 Tribal Education Final Version - 30.04.2012
Wapping High School – Consultation 2009 - 2012
Summary Consultation over the plans to open Wapping High School have been ongoing since 2009. A period of statutory consultation took place from 26 March 2012 to 4 May 2012. The results of the Statutory Consultation reflect the community and responses to the consultation survey show that there is considerable support for the creation of Wapping High School.
Introduction An important step in opening any new school is the signing of a Funding Agreement. This is the contract between the school’s Trust and the Secretary of State for Education – it outlines how the school must operate in certain areas, the obligations placed upon it by the Government, and key Guidelines and Codes it must adhere to, amongst other things Section 10 of the Academies Act 2010 requires the Trustees to carry out a consultation before the Funding Agreement can be completed: “Section 10 Consultation: additional schools. (1) Before entering into Academy arrangements with the Secretary of State in relation to an additional school, a person must consult such persons as the person thinks appropriate. (2) The consultation must be on the question of whether the arrangements should be entered into.” This report describes the consultation undertaken by The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust as part of the pre-opening project for Wapping High School. Since the initiation of the campaign to open a Free School in March 2010 the campaign group, which subsequently became the Trust, has been committed to consulting with the public over every aspect of their proposal. The report is divided into three sections: 1. Consultation undertaken from September 2010 - February 2012 2. Statutory consultation undertaken from 26 March - 4 May 2012 3. Analysis and conclusions The target audience for public consultation can be divided into a number of key groups as listed below. This demonstrates the extensive consultation undertaken. Key groups for consultation are: ● Local parents ● Local residents and community leaders ● The London Borough of Tower Hamlets council authority (council executives and elected members) ● Local Primary and Secondary Schools ● Local Businesses
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 1/22 Section 1: Consultation from May 2010 - February 2012
Consultation with local parents A range of methods has been used to consult with local parents. ● In May 2010 260 randomly selected families from Wapping were asked to respond to a survey concerning our plans for a new co-educational Secondary School and to comment on the general provision of Secondary Schools in the area. 70% of respondents stated that they were not satisfied with the existing provision of Secondary Schools in Wapping. 77% stated that they would consider sending their children to a co-educational Secondary School in Wapping. ● As part of our exercise to gather evidence of demand, representatives from the Trust have visited eight local Primary Schools at the end of the school day for three days per week per school. The purpose of the exercise was to clearly explain the vision for the Free School, ask parents to register their support if they were interested in a future application to the school and to respond to feedback and answer questions. In line with our expectations the most common question has been to ask for reassurance that the Free School will be small and co-educational. ● A number of parents who are not involved with the project have hosted informal information and feedback sessions. This provided the Trust with the opportunity to work through the detail of our proposal and receive feedback and suggestions for improvement. As a result of these sessions the Trust has been made aware of the need to ensure that the initial cohort of children starting in 2012 – 2014 have the opportunity to interact and work with older students. Therefore, the Trust has sought partnership with two existing local Secondary Schools. Also, parents have made it clear that it is less important to have a wide range of subjects or specialisms and more important to teach well. As a result we have decided to limit our specialism to 'Enterprise and Innovation'. ● Occasionally individual parents have either emailed with specific questions about the proposed Free School or have requested a meeting to discuss the proposal further. Every email has been responded to and every meeting requested has occurred. ● All feedback from parents, regardless of source, has either been discussed at one of the Trust's weekly review meetings or at one of the monthly Project Steering Committee meetings. ● During January and February 2012 the Trust offered to hold parent information sessions at local primary schools. Sessions were held at Hermitage Primary School, St Peter’s London Docks Primary School, Gatehouse Montessori, Sir John Cass Primary School and English Martyrs RC Primary School. ● During February 2012 the Trust ran four Primary School Workshops on uniform policy. The discussion with local children has helped inform WSSET on the students views and choices, and influenced policy.
Consultation with local residents and community leaders Residents living in Wapping and Shadwell have been consulted using the following methods: ● Clear details concerning our vision and proposals for the Free School have been made available on our website www . wappinghigh . org . The website is constantly updated to provide accurate information. The website is regularly advertised on community websites and email groups such as www . whatsinwapping . co . uk , netmums.co.uk, mumsnet.com and the Tower Hamlets NCT email group.
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 2/22 ● The website provides telephone numbers for the Trust and the means to email the Trust. ● Users of the website are invited to join our email list for regular updates and information. There are currently 375 names on the email list and a further 200 names on our postal list. ● Printed registration forms (see Appendix A), which include details of our proposal, links to our website and an address and telephone number have been left at local restaurants, cafes,́ community centres etc. ● Two half-day information events have been held at local community hubs (Waitrose Supermarket on 21/05/11 and Watney Market 24/05/11). These events were run by members of the Trust and served to reach out to a wider audience within the community. ● In July 2011 the Trust ran an information stall at the Wapping Shindig, a local festival on Wapping Green. The event was attended by around 300 people. ● Postings on community websites mentioned above have served to inform the local public as well as parents. Comments and feedback left on community websites have been reviewed and responded to directly, where reasonable. ● A number of local residents have emailed the Trust with questions, feedback or support. All of these emails have been responded to. ● Community leaders such as faith leaders have been contacted to explain the proposals for Wapping High School so that they might pass the information on to their community. ● A local councillor forwarded one letter of objection to our proposal from a local resident. The Trust contacted the resident directly to advise them of our proposal and reassure them that their concerns had been listened to. As a result we received a positive response. ● A number of articles have appeared in the local press about our proposal for a new Free School. These papers include The Wharf, the East London Advertiser, Docklands24 and The Evening Standard. ● A advertisement was placed in April 2011 in the local community newspaper East End Life.
Consultation with the London Borough of Tower Hamlets Discussions have been ongoing with Children's Services and Communities, Localities and Culture Departments at the London Borough of Tower Hamlets (LBTH) since November 2009 regarding the desperate need for a new co-educational Secondary School for families in Wapping and Shadwell. The Trust has gone to great lengths to ensure that we have consulted thoroughly with Tower Hamlets over every aspect of our proposal. Diana Warne, Head of Secondary Learning and Achievement at Tower Hamlets, has sat on the Project Steering Committee in an advisory capacity since May 2010. Ms Warne has also had the opportunity to review the application for a Free School as it was being written. A full copy of the complete application was sent to LBTH. On 4th May 2011 Isobel Cattermole wrote to Mayor Rahman to endorse our proposal. A copy of this letter is provided in Appendix B. Following an email to Kevan Collins, CEO of Tower Hamlets, to update him on our progress we received this response as an email:
May 19th 2011 Dear Kerstyn, This appears to be going well. Thanks for engaging so positively with the Council and our partners. If there is more I can do please don't hesitate to make contact.
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 3/22 Kevan Collins Chief Executive London Borough Tower Hamlets ww w www . towerhamlets . gov . uk
On the 1st April 2011 Jake Kemp and Kerstyn Comley visited the Houses of Parliament to meet with Jim Fitzpatrick MP for Poplar and Limehouse. At the meeting Mr Fitzpatrick was informed of the plans for Wapping High School. Since then Mr Fitzpatrick has played a key role in facilitating correspondence between the Trust and Tower Hamlets Council. All of the elected members of Tower Hamlets Council have been kept fully informed of the proposal for Wapping High School via letters, emails and meetings. Councillors have been given every opportunity to forward on letters of concern from local residents (so far we are only aware of two such letters). A request has been made to Mayor Rahman for a meeting to update him with the proposal for Wapping High School. Details of our proposals for Wapping High School have additionally been sent to the Corporation of the City of London as they are our closest neighbouring local authority. Throughout the planning of Wapping High School the Trust has consistently sought to identify solutions which will bring benefits to local families, and residents of Tower Hamlets and its neighbours more generally. Contact has also been made with The City of London and Southwark Council to make sure they are up to date with the plans.
Consultation with local schools Letters were written to all of the state funded schools in Tower Hamlets on approval of the Free School application in October 2011. The Trust has offered to meet with all the Headteachers at these schools to explain the proposal for Wapping High School. As a result visits have been made to Hermitage Primary School, St Peter's Primary School, English Martyrs Primary School, Bigland Green Primary School and St Paul's Primary School (the Trust met with the school administrator at St Paul's Primary School). Meetings have also taken place at the following Secondary schools: Mulberry Girls School, Langdon Park, Bethnal Green Academy, City of London Boys School and City of London Girls School. The Trust has also met with Gatehouse Montessori Primary School. The outcome of all of these meetings has been a commitment to work in partnership to improve the provision of education for children in Tower Hamlets.
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 4/22 Section 2: Statutory public consultation
Consultation activities A six week period of statutory consultation was undertaken from 26 March 2012 until 4 May 2012. The following activities were undertaken to ensure that all of the stakeholders (see Introduction) were consulted. 1. The consultation document was available for download from the Trust’s Website. 2. The way to respond to the consultation, via an on-line survey, was clearly described on the website. 3. Results from the on-line survey were regularly checked and requests for feedback were responded to. 4. 5000 consultation flyers were printed and distributed within Wapping, Shadwell, Whitechapel and Limehouse. The flyer contained the consultation survey and a freepost address. A copy of the consultation flyer is given in Appendix C. 5. The following sentence in Bengali was included on the consultation flyer 'A new school to be set up in Wapping. For more information please contact the trust via email or telephone'. 6. Regular emails have been sent to the Trust’s mailing list providing details of how to respond to the consultation. 7. Families who requested information about the school were sent the consultation flyer. 8. Details of the public consultation were provided on community website ‘What’s in Wapping’. 9. A copy of the consultation document was sent to all headteachers and governors in Tower Hamlets via the local authority. 10. Information about the consultation was emailed to community leaders and local politicians. 11. On 31 March 2012 the Trust ran an information stall at the Wapping Recycling Event on Wapping Green. The Trust spoke to around 35 local residents at the event. 12. Between 9 April - 22 April the Trust placed advertisements giving information about the consultation in East End Life, a newspaper run by Tower Hamlets that is delivered to every household. 13. On 18 April 2012 the Trust held a Public Consultation Meeting at St Paul’s Church, Shadwell. The event was well attended (50 plus). Headteacher, Paul Guénault, and directors from The Wapping & Shadwell Secondary Education Trust (namely Jon Cheyne, Kerstyn Comley, Jake Kemp, Monowara Bakht and Keith Sharp) met with interested parties. Information boards with plans for the school were provided. A number of individuals at the meeting expressed opposition to Free Schools in general, and some were concerned about the effect of having an additional school in the borough, everyone was given an opportunity to speak and appropriate responses were given. Everyone who attended had the opportunity to respond to the consultation via the survey. 14. On 19 April 2012 the Trust ran an event called “Meet the Headteacher”. This event was well attended (80 plus). Headteacher, Paul Guénault, and directors from The Wapping & Shadwell Secondary Education Trust (namely Jon Cheyne, Kerstyn Comley, Isabel Hinohosa, Shona Black, and Jake Kemp) met with interested families. Information boards with plans for the school were provided.
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 5/22 15. In April the Docklands newspaper ran an article about the school with information about the consultation. 16. On 1st May trustee Jake Kemp attended the Tower Hamlets Children’s Services Director’s Brief and addressed approximately 100 local School Governors and responded to questions regarding the consultation.
Consultation results The following four questions were asked in the consultation survey: Q1. Should the Trustees enter into a Funding Agreement with the Secretary of State for Education in order to open Wapping High School? Q2. Do you agree with the Admissions Policy? Q3. Do you agree that a Free School is needed in this area of Tower Hamlets? Q4. Are there any other comments you wish the trustees to take into consideration? Sixty eight responses were received to the consultation survey, 61 electronically and 8 by post. A count of the responses to questions 1 to 3 is given in table 2.1 and shown as percentages in figures 2.1 to 2.3 All of the comments given in response to question 4 provided in Appendix D. If respondents have asked a question the Trust will reply directly following publication of this report.
Q1 Q2 Q3 Yes 43 41 44 No 18 17 17 Not answered 8 10 8
Table 2.1 Count of responses to survey questions.
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 6/22 12%
Yes No 26% Not answered 62%
Figure 2.1 Response to question 1: Should the Trustees enter into a Funding Agreement with the Secretary of State for Education in order to open Wapping High School?
16%
Yes No Unanswered 25% 59%
Figure 2.2 Response to question 2: Do you agree with the Admissions Policy for Wapping High School?
12%
Yes 25% No Not answered
64%
Figure 2.3 Response to question 3: Do you agree that a Free School is needed in this area of Tower Hamlets?
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 7/22 Section 3: Analysis and conclusions The results of the Statutory Consultation reflect the community. Responses to questions 1 - 3 show that there is considerable support for the creation of Wapping High School. 61% of respondents agree that the Trustees should enter into a Funding Agreement with the Secretary of State for Education and 63% agree that a Free School is needed in this area of Tower Hamlets. Where responses to questions 1 - 3 are negative accompanying comments indicate that there is opposition to Wapping High as a Free School both for political reasons and for specific local reasons. However, there is no consistent body of opposition, every response is of an individual nature. A small number of queries were raised via the consultation survey and the public consultation meeting regarding the impact that Wapping High School will have on other local secondary schools. The Trust recognises that some under-subscribed schools may loose pupils in 2012/13 because of Wapping High School's intake. It has worked with the local authority's Children's Services Directorate's Admissions Department to lessen the impact on other schools. Predictions of pupil places provided by Tower Hamlets [1] indicate that from 2013 onwards there will be a shortfall in excess of 90 places. Wapping High School will only contribute an additional 81 places each year. The consultation has raised issues about the Admissions Policy and the Trust has reviewed its Admissions Policy accordingly. Details can be found on the website. Since 2009 ongoing consultation has been overwhelmingly positive. Where individuals have been unclear or opposed to the plans the Trust has made every effort to provide clarity and resolution. The Trust is grateful to the many that support our efforts, and also to those that make the time to voice concerns and to challenge.
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 8/22 Appendix A - Copy of registration flyer
Figure A1: Front of Registration of Interest form
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 9/22 Figure A2: Rear of Registration of Interest form
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 10/22 Appendix B: Letter from I Cattermole, Interim Director of Children's Services
Children, Schools and Families Directorate Tower Hamlets Town Hall Mulberry Place Mayor Lutfur Rahman 5 Clove Crescent Members Office London E14 2BG Tel 020 7364 4956 Town Hall Fax 020 7364 3295 Mulberry Place E14 2BG www.towerhamlets.gov.uk
4th May 2011 Our Ref: ME 1-53060202
Dear Mayor Rahman
Thank you for your enquiry and attached letter of support for the proposals to open a new secondary school in Wapping.
As Director of Children, Schools and families I am concerned that residents in all parts of the Tower Hamlets area should feel they have the same opportunity to secure their child a place at a nearby secondary school. My senior officers and I have already been in touch with colleagues at the Wapping and Shadwell Trust and will continue to offer advice, assistance and any other forms of support we can. The Council's aim is to ensure that the Trust is given full opportunity to establish its proposals. We expect that it will be an inclusive and high quality secondary education provision, with an admissions policy that will provide fair opportunity for access to all families in the Wapping and Shadwell areas.
Yours sincerely
Isobel Cattermole Corporate Director (Children, Schools & Families)
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 11/22 Appendix C - Copy of consultation flyer
Figure C1: Front consultation flyer
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 12/22 Figure C2: Inside consultation flyer
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 13/22 Figure C3: Back consultation flyer
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 14/22 Appendix D: Response to consultation survey
No. Postcode Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Comments The area outlined in the admissions zone excludes people outside of Wapping area but who do not have any other non-faith school alternatives. Please consider this as part of the catchment considerations, 1 blank blank blank Thank you 2 E1W Yes Yes yes In no particular order:
1) Why are pupils with SEN being prioritised for entry? Surely, you should accept students regardless and if there is a SEN that can be catered for by the school, so be it. 2) What is the aim of the school for the total number of students on the roll once each year group is fully populated? I would guess that numbers would have to be between 100 and 150 pupils per year group. Is the selected premises going to be able to cope with up to 800 people in it and what of any outdoor space? 3) Will there be any gym space? Where will PE and Games lessons be held and for what length of lesson and how often? 4) The site of the selected premises is very close to both Mulberry Girls School and Bishop Challoner. Surely a more westerly or southerly location is required to serve the needs of the priority area in West Bethnal Green and South Wapping respectively. 5) With the extended day, how many contact hours will the average full time staff member with no additional responsibilities have per week? How will they be compensated both in terms of preparation/assessment/marking time and remuneration compared to the borough average? 6) Is giving parent's the ability to select their child for the G&T register a good idea? Is this not an open door for pushy parents? Surely teacher and 3 E1W blank blank blank formal assessment should be the only yardsticks? 4 E1W blank blank blank Should not be called Wapping High School as it is not in Wapping. 5 e1w blank blank blank 6 E3 blank blank blank 7 E1W yes yes yes 8 E1W blank blank blank I think the extended day should not be 4 days aweek, it will be too much
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 15/22 No. Postcode Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Comments for the children. As a parent i am having to think twice now about if i should give my son there. I think it should only be twice aweek. 9 E14 blank blank blank While not a resident of the area south of Cable Street (but I am within walking distance of the school's location), it seems that there is a lack of places at mixed secondary schools - particularly in non-faith-based schools - serving the Wapping South zone and beyond. It was not that long ago (within my lifetime) when much of Wapping was derelict. Since the 1980s, the community has undergone a rapid transformation - though over these last 30 years or so, secondary school provision to serve this community has been largely overlooked. Wapping High School will only partly address this problem: it surprises me that the question whether such a school is needed is even being asked - surely this is a 'no-brainer'. My guess is that those questioning the need for this school are more politically opposed to free schools, rather than that they actually disagree with the premise that there is a lack of secondary school provision in the area. Tower Hamlets is an extremely diverse borough, and should easily incorporate - and benefit from - a wide diversity of secondary school provision. It is particularly hypocritical of the Local Authority - which claims to celebrate diversity - to have been stonewalling this project so 10 E1 yes yes yes much. I would like to be more focused on discipline which you are considerd it 11 e3 blank blank blank already 12 E1W blank blank blank 13 E1W Yes Yes Yes 14 E1W Yes Yes Yes 15 E1 Yes Yes Yes 16 E1W Yes Yes Yes Admissions should be based on being a tower hamlets resident, not just being able to afford to live in wapping. Some people either can not afford to buy/rent the space in Wapping so the school will end up being a mid/high income school for middle/upper classes who choose not to go 17 e14 Yes No Yes into Private schools. . 18 e1w Yes Yes Yes 19 E1 Yes No Yes 20 E1 Yes No Yes
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 16/22 No. Postcode Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Comments 21 E1W Yes Yes Yes 22 e1w Yes Yes Yes The lack of Secondary Education in the local area is one of the biggest reasons why we would look to leave London. The Wapping High School not only fills a gap, but it's ethos and educational approach make it a reason to stay in London- this type of secondary education makes emornous sense and cannot be found in most traditionally funded 23 E1W Yes Yes Yes schools. Are there any future proposals to to extend this to primary school aged provision? Will you be looking towards working with other local primary and 24 E14 Yes Yes Yes secondary schools and headteachers? We do not need a Free School in Wapping and a number of parents are appalled you are using Helen Mirren to support your cause. Someone with more knowledge of education and its effect on our children would 25 E1W No No No be more appropriate 26 E2 No Yes No 27 E1w Yes Yes Yes 28 E14 Yes Yes Yes It does not seem fair that the admission of this free school is limited to Wapping/Shadwell catchment (yes I know new housing south of cabel st will attraact non wapping), but there are children outside this area who also need secondary schools and who currently have limited options.
Tower Hamlets needs to influence (mandate) a more diverse school population in ALL of its schools. Many are either 95% non white, making these options not viable for families who want to integrate their white children but do not want to be the first to put their child in a class where 95% wear headscarves.
I know for a fact that Mullberry school for girls, Sir John Cass Secondary are being rejected by white lower/middle class parents due to the ethnic mix in the school means someone’s white child will be in the minority. If each school in TH had to have 4 out of 10 places reserved for non indian/bengali, and if those 4 places (white/black) children did take up the places they were left vacant (ie smaller classes sizes), then the 29 E14 Yes No Yes parents currently having to move out of the area would start to change
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 17/22 No. Postcode Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Comments their views and put their child into these schools, which in turn would be a benefit for everyone. Its going to take brave steps by Tower Hamlets Education and Mayor Rahman to make all of our wonderful multicultural TH work together. Come on, what are we waiting for.... 30 E1W Yes Yes Yes I am in support of the project PROVIDED the admissions policy is the 31 E14 Yes Yes Yes same as for all other secondary schools in Towaer Hamlets. 32 E14 No Yes No 33 E2 Yes Yes Yes 34 E3 Yes Yes Yes I rather wish you had been even more ambitious in your academic aims. Tower Hamlets needs to raise aspiration and achievement by demonstrating success in an easily understood way - academic results. That might not chime well with the 'fairness = equality of outcome' lobby but the school has an ideal opportunity to shed the image of Tower Hamlets schools as being overly concerned with social issues at the expense of the best education. I would far rather my child can read, write, embraces the realities of competition and speaks a modern language so that he can make his own way in life than knows his rights, interviews teachers, is socially aware in East London or saves the world. Teaching him values is my job, I do not want the school to ram a particular brand of social awareness into him. He can do that later. 35 E14 Yes No Yes Please also have a strict uniform and discipline policy. 36 E14 No No No 37 E1 No Yes No I have answered 'no' to q1 and q3 because there is no opportunity to record 'yes with reservations'. There is certainly a need for co- educational secondary provision in this part of the borough, and if the free school route is the only way of achieving this, so be it. But the rush to establish it means a most unsuitable location: Commercial Street is certainly not 'Wapping', and cannot provide suitable facilities (a lesson learned over a century ago.....) It would be a great mistake to spend a lot of money on this site rather than continue to search for a more appropriate location - eg the News International site. I'm puzzled by the term 'south Wapping' (which extends well to the north of E1W and what most people would consider to be Wapping) - where might 'north Wapping' be? All this will play badly, and into the hands of those who suspect a middle-class agenda (despite the unexceptionable admissions
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 18/22 No. Postcode Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Comments policy). There are plenty of good schools you people just do not think they are 38 e1w No Yes No good enough. If you put your kids in them it would raise the standards. The Board of Governors at Wellington School in Bow has discussed this proposal and consider it divisive, channelling funds and expertise away from increasing the expertise of teaching and learning in Tower Hamlets. We fail to see the relevance of your Patron (Dame Helen Mirren) who has no children or experience of educating young children today. We challenge this proposal as a detriment to other children within the area. Personally, as a resident in Wapping I would object to the proposals for this school. 39 E1W No No No Name withheld, Chair of Governors, Wellington School. Tower Hamlets borough has a strong Education authority built up over years with an ethos of cooperation between schools, support for all children and teachers and has given an education for students that enables them to achieve highly. Separate Free schools are divisive in the borough and would not enhance 40 E1 No No No the community's provision for education. 41 E1 No No No 42 e1w Yes Yes Yes 43 E1W Yes Yes Yes 44 E3 No No No I think it is a great shame that the people who have such foresight and energy to consider starting a new school don't direct that valuable effort 45 E3 No No No to the existing, yet undersubscribed, schools within Tower Hamlets. There are several schools in the area that are far from full to capacity, Bishop Challoner and Mulberry being just two in the immediate area. To open yet another school within 2 bus stops of those is irresponsible and unececssary when other existing schools with existing facilities and low numbers are going to be under utilised. Students who already study at these emptying local schools will have their education suffer as a result from loss of funding due to fewer filled places all thanks to this vanity 46 E3 No Yes No project covered with the facade of a Free School. I would like to understand the predicted impact on schools elsewhere in Tower Hamlets of the opening of the Wapping High School. In 47 E3 No No No particular, what assessment has been made regarding the likely impact on
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 19/22 No. Postcode Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Comments application rates to other schools? I understand anecdotally that there are already unfilled places at 'Outstanding' Tower Hamlets schools, where is the evidence of overwhelming need for this school? What impact will this school have on funding for existing schools in the area and the support that the Local Authority offers them? Can you guarantee that funding will not be taken from the Local Authority to fund this school at the expense of others in the borough, and that the school will not receive preferential levels of funding for its pupils?
Finally, I would like to attend the meeting on April 18th to hear the debate about the school, please can you let me know what time it is taking place? There is no need for a new secondary school in Wapping. This school will undermine the education of Tower Hamlets children by reducing numbers (and therefore funding) at other local secondary schools.
Wapping High is being set up based on false claims, namely:-
1. that there is a shortage of secondary school places 2. that children based in Wapping, Limehouse and Shadwell have no access to good, mixed, non faith-based schools.
In fact, all London secondary school age children have free bus travel by Oyster. There are many good, mixed, non faith-based schools in Tower Hamlets which can easily be accessed by children in Wapping and Shadwell. Swanlea School in Whitechapel is one example. This school is very close to Wapping (less than 2 miles). It admits both girls and boys and has no religious affiliations. The school is judged Outstanding by Ofsted and results are above national averages.
I am dismayed that this school may be given permission go ahead, and feel that it will damage the prospects of children at excellent, established schools which are set up genuinely in the interests of the whole 48 E3 No No No population of Tower Hamlets. This is a wonderful initiative which I fully support. As a govenor of a school in Towrr Hamlets I know first hand that there is a need for this 49 E1 Yes Yes Yes type of school. 50 E18 No Yes Yes N/A
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 20/22 No. Postcode Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Comments 51 e1 No No No Tower Hamlets has worked hard to build up the great standard of schools we have today from nursery right through to tertiary level education, and at the same time encouraging harmonious mixed communities (mixed in terms of cultural financial and religious backgrounds). The use of Tower Hamlets LEA funds to finance exclusive 'free' schools' that will either collapse and disappear (or be bailed out by the state) in the future or become very elite and select private schools is appalling. Our schools are already suffering with severe budget cuts and the bailing out of a badly set up PFI scheme. I disagree with the whole principle of 'free schools' and can only see it damaging the delicate cohesion of our communities and all that Tower Hamlets Education has achieved.
I also don't understand why a school would want to be promoted by an actress who in most of her interviews gloats about her selfish lifestyle and choice to be childless. 52 E14 No No No Name withheld (mother of 2) I, name withheld, Chair of Wapping Bangladesh Association, whole heartedly support this project and if there is anythig i could do on Behalf the Bangladeshi community living in Wapping, please let me know. Many thanks to every one who have taken this initiative.
53 E1W Yes Yes Yes kind regards, name withheld 54 E1 Yes Yes Yes 55 E1 Yes Yes Yes 56 E1W Yes Yes Yes 57 E14 Yes Yes Yes Tower Hamlets has one of the highest levels of young people not in education or employment (neet), the streets are full of kids with massive potential, but insufficient training to equip them to be successful. Wapping high is exactly what the area needs, a creative, innovative solution in order to see Tower Hamlet's young people given the opportunities they need to succeed academically and beyond. I personally was born here and went outside the borough to receive a better education I am looking forward to the day that Tower Hamlets residents can be proud to live here and have educational opportunities that prepare their kids adequately for a successful life fulfilling their
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 21/22 No. Postcode Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Comments potential. I would like to request that the admission policy is reviewed to suit individual needs and requirements, I would also like to stress that uniform is introduced so that no child is left out when it comes to dressing otherwise students will wear what they feel like and that would 58 E14 Yes Yes Yes not establish equality I would like the code of conduct of the school to also explictly include homophobia in addition to bullying, racism, sexism and interpersonal behaviour. Looking forward to welcoming the new school to my 59 E1 Yes Yes Yes neighbourhood. 60 E1 No No No 61 E1w Yes Yes Yes 62 Yes Yes Yes Setting up ties with City Gateway so that kids who don't go on to further 63 Yes Yes Yes education can still achieve a career 64 Yes Blank Yes No comment 65 Yes Blank Yes 66 Yes Yes Yes 67 Yes Yes Yes 68 Yes Yes Yes The IOD + Wapping need new secondary schools that are not religious 69 Number withheld Yes Blank Yes and available to everyone. 70 Email withheld Yess Yes Yes
The Wapping and Shadwell Secondary Education Trust 22/22