C.A.M. parents Teachers Residents
Keep Kings

Thursday 29 September 2011

Investigation to be debated in Chamber?

The petition you signed calling for 


We the undersigned would like an official investigation into the role of Surrey County Council and its consultancy company Babcock4S in the proposed "take-over" of Kings International School by Tomlinscote School. Particular reference is drawn to the decision making process in the preceding years and to the actual consultation process and its review.


http://petitions.surreycc.gov.uk/SCCeduReview/


Hopefully will get to be debated in chamber as there have been questions if it is still relevant?


Letter to committee attached..

To:
admin@surreyyouthfocus.org.uk,carol.coleman@surreycc.gov.uk,cath.edwards@surreycc.gov.uk,cecile.dorvault@btinternet.com,cherylh@surreycc.gov.uk,chris.townsend@surreycc.gov.uk,Chris@eikon.org.uk,clare.curran@surreycc.gov.uk,colincaswell@blueyonder.co.uk,denise.turner@surreycc.gov.uk,derek.holbird@cofeguildford.org.uk,diana.smith@surreycc.gov.uk,dorothy.rosstomlin@surreycc.gov.uk,duncanhewson@me.com,info@eikon.org.uk,jolene.hill@essnmedia.co.uk,kathy.beresford@surreycc.gov.uk,keith.taylor@surreycc.gov.uk,marsha.moseley@surreycc.gov.uk,nigel.cooper@surreycc.gov.uk,Penny.Plato@babcock.co.uk,peter.lambell@surreycc.gov.uk,rachel.yexley@surreycc.gov.uk,rashid.jussa@surreycc.gov.uk,sally.marks@surreycc.gov.uk,sean.whetstone@gmail.com


On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 11:47 PM, Ian Sorby <ian.sorby@gmail.com> wrote:

Members may also be interested to read the legal dissection of SCC's Merger consultation document provided by a lawyer specialising in education matters. At worst it suggests that SCC would have lost a legal appeal at best it shows the slipshod nature of the departments work when subjected to legal review.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0BwVruf_Q4Uv6ZjA2YjQ2MWItMTkyMS00NTg0LThhNjAtZTFkYmU1Nzc1NGY1&hl=en_US

bregds

Ian..


On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 7:59 AM, Ian Sorby <ian.sorby@gmail.com> wrote:
Members of the committee may also wish to acquaint themselves with some of the FOI information that shows the working of the education department here.



many thanks

Ian Sorby


On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:17 AM, Ian Sorby <ian.sorby@gmail.com> wrote:



 While the Education Department of Surrey County Council is faced with difficult decisions made all the more complex by uncertainty in population forecasts and by the economic woes, its recent performance leaves considerable room for improvement.

1) The manner in which it relates to the public (PJ Wilkinson as an example) is very poor.  The public are left with the feeling that they are considered as an "inconvenience" to implementation of the will of the department.

2) The manner in which it conducts its business behind closed doors (as revealed by FOI requests) is manipulative to the extent that if certain actions are not actually illegal they are at best cavalier, and certainly immoral.

3) The prosecution of the Tomlinscote-Kings merger was so slipshod in its execution and its failure to have any sort of plan B or C that it raises grave questions as to the competence / arrogance of the department.

The Tomlinscote-Kings merger cost a significant amount of money, and influenced the lives of many people in Surrey Heath.  Some people moved house, some left their jobs and many were so affected that their relationship with their County Council will be materially damaged for years to come.  This was unnecessary if the Education Department had been more efficient and professional in their work.  These problems continue to exist and I feel it is imperative we learn from the mistakes so it does not happen again.

Those involved in the Merger decision from a public side continue to be involved and would be happy to aid Surrey County Council in a review.  An SCC review would be considered preferable to our continuing to investigate it from outside.

bregds


Ian Sorby


Thursday 8 September 2011

Camberley schools work together

http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/s/2099375_frimley_and_camberley_schools_to_work_together

I have been asked to shed some light on the inaccurate statement in this article..

"Tomlinscote School in Tomlinscote Way, Frimley and Kings International College in Watchetts Drive, Camberley, have been part of a ‘soft’ federation, where they share a governing body "


The schools do not share a governing body and the following mails explain how SCC and Mr Ryles effected the dissolution of the Kings governing body.










Thursday 21 July 2011

New Chair of the Tomlinscote Governing body from September

Will be Cllr R Paton.

Bob is the Conservative councillor for the St Michaels ward of SHBC and active in a number of local committees.


Council CommitteesJoint Staff Consultative Group
Leisure and Environment Scrutiny Committee
Licensing Committee
Planning Applications Committee
Policy and Audit Scrutiny Committee

Tomlinscote headteacher defends merger talk

Please see

http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/s/2096692_tomlinscote_headteacher_defends_merger_talk

Thousands of people have already read Mr Ryles' email trail and will form their own opinions.  Mr Ryles' legacy is unimportant relative to the need for the new administration to avoid the mistakes of the past.

Please see
http://tomlinscote-kings.blogspot.com/2011/07/little-history.html

An article which expresses no opinion but presents the reader with the raw data upon which to base their own judgements. It is a long and complex trail which bears reading a couple of times if you are to understand the full import and context. I imagine that people will demand significant increase in transparency levels in future and will take a keen interest in the workings of the Headmaster and Governing Body as we proceed into a new administration.

Ian Sorby..


comments


I have been following this story very closely and have not seen any accusations, such as those described in the first paragraph. Documents supplied by Mr Ryles under the FOI request was made publicly available to enable worried parents to move on into the new term with a clear picture of what was behind the proposal that had taken over their lives for the past three months. There was no guidance as to what should be interpreted by the words included on the page - there was no need for interpretation as the messages were loud and crystal clear.

Mr Ryles has been a well respected Head of Tomlinscote for over 20 years. In three months he has managed to tarnish his own good name and remove all traces of repect that the parents and teachers have had for him. It should be made clear that HIS OWN ACTIONS have been the cause of this. He knew the risks, for some reason he was happy to take the risks, but now when it has blown up in his face he is trying to make out he is the innocent victim in this.

At this stage most people would have just quietly slipped away, say nothing and enjoy a long and happy retirement, but Mr Ryles has to try to have the last word, try to convince us he acted honourably and try to make out that we are not understanding the situation properly. We understand the situation and nothing you can say or do, Mr Ryles, will renew my respect for you. You had it and you have lost it forever.

I look forward to the new Tomlinscote next term and will be pleased to welcome a new head and a new ethos to the school - which will hopefully be based around honesty, trust & respect.



For Mr Ryles to say: "Mr Sorby's interpretation of events is at best mischievous and totally ignores any context." I say to you Mr Ryles, Lack of information combined with selected contact with parents was always going to bread mistrust and misunderstaning. At the first meeting in March we were promised a meeting with Governors, we had to wait 3 months for that! Paper work released shows that in Nov 2010 Mr Ryles agreed with a written statement that said 'Moving to a hard federation is is best option but need to move first through formal soft federation in order for Governors not to take fright' Mr Ryles was the tail wagging the dog?



Both Mr Ryles and Surrey Council do both seem to suffer from acute memory lapses when it comes to remembering what was said and when. Thank goodness therefore, that accurate Minutes are taken and that emails are sent between interested parties before and after such meetings. It was obvious from other Minutes and emails (not published) that Collingwood and Tomlinscote heads and governors, both wanted there to be just two secondary schools in Surrey Heath, Kings was squeezed from all sides by the 'big boys'. I would love to know how far Mr John Edwards (the previous head of Kings) was involved in these meetings. Perhaps the "out of context" Mr Ryles is referring to, is the fact that Mr Edwards was kept in the dark about many of these initial proposals, certainly his name is rarely mentioned in most documents.

By his own hand/computer, Mr Ryles admits to keeping secrets not only from his own Board of Governors but also from Her Majesty's Inspectorate. These were not out of context. The fact that Kings International had a large deficit was down to Surrey County Council getting their sums wrong in the first place, when they put France Hill (as Kings was then) in partnership with 3E's. SCC also did not fulfil their part of the contract, as various important 'Deeds' were never passes to 3E's so as to help rectify this deficit. During Mr Edward's headship, the school was starting to flourish, more students applying, academic results improving, and the budget deficit did not increase by one penny. It was slow, but Mr Edwards had a vision, which was shared by staff and parents. We all knew there were some difficulties in some areas of the school but we were assured that these issues were being dealt with through the avenues of "protocol", which exists in any government run establishment. I found it quite strange that SCC suddenly wrote off the deficit and Mr Ryles was allowed to push through the management changes almost instantly, something Mr Edwards had been at pains to do "by the book". I do wonder if Mr Ryles resigned when he finally realised that SCC were back paddling over the extra financial support he would need to take over the Kings site fully.

I acknowledge that Mr Ryles worked hard to bring Kings out of Special Measures; he devoted a great deal of time and effort to the Kings site. With this in mind, surely, it must be Mrs Zoe Johnson Walker, who should be congratulated for ensuring that Tomlinscote achieved the outstanding Ofsted result it deserved. I am not a Tomlinscote parent, but I know they hold her in high regard.

I am a Kings International parent, who has always been proud of the college and its achievements. The staff are incredible, working with an increasing diverse array of students from all walks of life. Some students leave Kings to go on to university or other forms of further education, while others go onto more vocational employment. However, each student is treated as an individual and not as a statistic to satisfy some league table. I chose Kings not just for its small size but also for its community and family ethos. Students and parents were both valued as important partners in education. That was lost under Mr Ryles regime. We are looking forward to Mr Ian Hylan coming in to take over the reins of both schools, and Mrs Judith Langley as Head of School at Kings. Hopefully they have taken on board, that it is perhaps better to engage with the teachers, parents, students and wider community in two way communication. We still feel Kings is better away from SCC and become an academy under a third party provider such as Oasis Community Learning, who will look at the whole of the Watchetts community and give it the support it needs for an exciting new future.

Over the last few weeks, since it was announced that the merger was not to take place and the "closure" of Kings has been put on hold (SCC are still looking at numbers in the autumn), and those "emails" were put up for all to see, there has been no apology from either Mr Ryles, Col. Steele or PJ Wilkinson at SCC, for the upset and anxiety they have caused the staff at both schools, the students and parents, and of course the wider community. Not one word of apology. I just hope that my daughter does not follow the example of these suppose leaders and the way they carry out their duties. I hope Mr Ryles enjoys his retirement.



In Mr Ryles' last letter to Kings he inserts, dare I say it, this rather mischievous comment..

The future may not 'look orange', but it certainly looks bright.

Tipping his hat to CAM perhaps?



And on a lighter note since this is descending into farce!



Tuesday 12 July 2011

Please Join me in signing the following

http://petitions.surreycc.gov.uk/SCCeduReview/

Petition to: Review the workings of SCC education and Babcock4S

We the undersigned would like an official investigation into the role of Surrey County Council and its consultancy company Babcock4S in the proposed "take-over" of Kings International School by Tomlinscote School. Particular reference is drawn to the decision making process in the preceding years and to the actual consultation process and its review.

Please note this petition closes 12 August 2011 so we have 30 days to sign up.


Please pass this on to everyone who might be interested and ask them to sign too.

CAM is NOT just Tomlinscote parents! Keep Kings.

Kings Parents upset by attempts to exclude CAM on the basis that it is a "Tomlinscote" only interest group.

have a look at the article on the KeepKings.org site here

Monday 11 July 2011

Surrey County Council are charged with...

Attempting to sidestep the whole process of consultation and ignore the opinions of 3000+ parents 2000+ children and 250+ staff.
Not informing feeder school parents early enough.
Not informing local residents.
Not informing local politicians.
Not informing local business who will be impacted by the changes.
Not informing the local hospital who already have traffic issues to deal with.
Not informing the SCC department responsible for traffic planning.
Not informing the local Nepalese community.

Running a consultation that showed no evidence of listening.

Producing a consultation document that presented one choice, was biased and of legal and moral questionability.

Basing evidence on documents that have not been agreed or finalised.

Running two consultations at the same time with different source data.

Attempting to ensure that Kings was not viable by using scare tactics to influence Kings parents and teachers to abandon the school. Attempts to run Kings down by failing to market the school.

Failing to respond to requests for data that might shed some light on the proposal (FOI).

Failing to adequately answer questions posed to them, to the point it could be classed as obstruction.

Failing to even read the results of the consultation - they have admitted that your consultation responses have not even been read - so how can they say they listened!

Another issue is the pressure placed on Tomlinscote Governors. SCC have tried both to make them seem responsible for the decision and provided little or nothing in the way of concrete plans for supporting the future.

Another concern of mine is the apparent lengths that those employed at County Hall will go to protect their own personal power and influence. A cynic observing this process would wonder if they are prosecuting a campaign to prevent the formation of academies that weaken their control. At one of the consultation meetings Michael Gove closed his eyes at one point and shook his head such was his annoyance at the anti academy stance of PJ Wilkinson. One councilor at a meeting we attended at County Hall expressed the concern that if everybody went for academy status SCC will lose control. So is SCC fighting the government and the DfE? Is SCC Education department prepared to affect the educational outcomes of 5000+ children to save their own jobs?

SCC should have done “due diligence” BEFORE going ahead with this not afterward. Given the resources (using my money) that are available to SCC in terms of legal and educational advice that they can be made to look stupid by a group of local parents on a shoestring budget has to be of grave and enduring concern.

As a tax and rates payer and thus the effective employer of those who work at County Hall I would like some answers as to why those I employ are both so incompetent and why they have such a disregard for those they serve. By answers I mean “real answers” as in I expect to see someone called to public account for this debacle, not that it is just brushed under the carpet.

Where does this stop PJ Wilkinson? Peter Martin? Andrew Povey?

Friday 8 July 2011

A little History.

Tomlinscote will start in September with a new Headmaster, a new Chair / vice Chair of Governors and a fresh spring in its step.  Talking to Parents, Staff and Governors I sense an excited expectation that a fresh management team will build on past successes while learning the required lessons from recent events.

The past 3 months and the "consultation" process have been very stressful for all and have been characterised by a lack of information which has created the ideal conditions for "fear, uncertainty and doubt", conspiracy theory and rumour.  A significant amount of factual information has come to light which can be used to shed light on the process by which the "merger" proposals came about.  It is in the public interest to put this behind us.

As Mr Ryles says..
"information will be provided in order for actions taken by individuals and institutions to be seen for what it is, and what it has always been i.e. transparent and honest".

In the spirit that Mr Ryles intended I have published the information so that the public can read through the process.



The plans for Tomlinscote to "take-over" Kings can be traced back at least as far as 2006 when Tony Ryles drew up the following document while in discussions with Surrey County Council.










In December 2009 Tony Ryles refers to this document in correspondence with SCC's consultancy company Babcock4s saying that "most of the points are still relevant today" he says he has given it "considerable thought" and is "more enthusiastic about the project".









The timeline places us firmly before Tony Ryles took over at Kings under a "soft federation" yet it is clear that the item under discussion is quite definitely a school "take-over" of Kings by Tomlinscote.  This is March 2009 and any neutrality in Mr Ryles' position is difficult to find.





The letter Mr Ryles refers to is interesting in that it states that Surrey County Council had asked him to take a "acting role pending a probable commercial 'external provider' taking responsibility for Kings at a later, but unspecified, date".  Mr Ryles seems to be making his involvement conditional on the promise of his preferred solution "take-over".









An "exceptional and confidential" governors meeting is called to discuss "potential reorganisation within Surrey Heath".  As is abundantly clear from lots of mails only the Chair and Vice Chair are aware of the plans.  Please note the date is still March 2010.






Further correspondance makes it clear that only two Governors know what is really going on.







Some evidence of more Governors being brought into the picture but other signs of exclusion, "there is a strict limit to how much paperwork I would want circulated in advance of the session".










The outcome of the meeting.  A soft federation is two separate financial entities, a hard federation model that would have enabled greater financial freedoms between the two sites was not passed.











Interesting document discussing financial arrangements for education of the 6th form and a reference to maybe just merging the two schools - essentially even further than a "hard federation".











Toward the end of 2010 Mr Ryles and PJ Wilkinson are still struggling with exactly how the "merger" or "hard federation" will look.  There appears to be difficulty for both sides in having their preferred option sanctioned.










More difficulty in bringing those who might sign off on decisions "on board".












Funding for Kings seems to be contingent on sale of Kings land.  So land must be sold to pay off money "advanced" to the school at some point in the future.










Still problems with trying to convince Andrew Povey (Leader of Surrey County Council) and the Governors.











February 2011 Mr Ryles announces his retirement although the actual reason is unclear.
It is still clear that the vast majority of the Governing body are not informed as to what is going on.
At this point Mr Ryles cites security concerns and starts to use his personal email address.












An initial draft by PJ Wilkinson (before extensive edits by Tony Ryles) paints a very different picture than is presented in the final release.










As the initial letter to parents is drafted by Surrey County Council for their proposal Tony Ryles helps them extensively with the process but is at pains to point out it is "their" process.











Still re-writing the letter and some discussion of Kings employment.













The Pre-consultation meetings are planned.












Mr Ryles gives advice on the meetings and his involvement.










Mr Ryles helps Surrey County Council with the consultation document.












PJ confused about Mr Ryles email identities since Mr Ryles' wife H Jorgensen (his PA and also clerk of Governors) is using Mr Ryles' personal email address.
PJ also says if it was up to him he would close Kings.












Well done if you made it this far, this represents a taster of the emails and the process that went on.