| 
| 
| 
|
 | 
| ||
| |||
Friday 15 July 2011
Thursday 14 July 2011
Kings Comes out of special measures
Well done to the staff and students who have managed this under very stressful conditions.
http://www.kings-international.co.uk/newsarticle.aspx?newsid=97
http://www.kings-international.co.uk/newsarticle.aspx?newsid=97
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.
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
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?
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?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)