C.A.M. parents Teachers Residents
Keep Kings

Saturday, 2 April 2011

Split site disadvantages

My goodness I had a browse around and I found LOTS of split site stuff.  There were some schools that had outstanding ratings that had split sites but even they wanted to be on one site.  Lots of schools that were having big difficulties because of a split site and some that were criticised by ofsted because of their inability to handle it.


Teachers suffered most - I suggest that you guys have a discussion on TES and contact your unions for information on their views about split site schools.  I'd love to hear your feedback.


I would be particularly interested if anyone knows or can get in touch personally with anyone who has worked in a split site school for their views.


It does not look that good I'm afraid.


tomlinscote.kings@gmail.com
http://anonymouse.org/anonemail.html  Please note when using this that emails will be randomly delayed by up to 12 hours to protect privacy.


I..




I have taught on a split site school for the past 5 years and the added stress of having to drive to your next lesson on a regular basis is starting to get to me. It means you are usually late for your lesson, the kids are already fighting in the corridor by the time you get to the classroom, you waste alot of time having to get everything set up - which means the class becomes even more unsettled and to make matters worse you lose 5 to 10 mins of your breaktime if you have to go the other campus to teach your next lesson. What makes matters worse at our school is the fact that some teachers don't have to do this at all and are not experiencing half the stress that i am. I think i should be payed more or given an extra PPA for having to do this regularly - do you agree / disagree...?

----

I take it that 'Schwarms' you have never worked on a split site school - I am currently at one and it is killing me. The staff are generally less supportive, there is no community or team feel amongst morale, the kids have more ownership of the classrooms than the teachers, you are permanently exhausted from travelling and often your break and/ or PPA will involve travelling. Its not the 'teaching' that is exhausting its the travelling, some days I dont get the chance to have a coffee or a toilet break as I am continually driving between sites, it makes marking difficult and planning non-existent during school time. I am relieved that I have been able to find another school to work at and leave this one behind, but I am fearful of the younger colleagues who will leave teaching as a profession thinking that this is how all schools operate.

I agree we shouldn't be paid more, but a more considerate timetable and supportive attitude from other teachers would help a little in making the workplace one that you want to stay at and develop a career. This is nothing about the stress of teaching but the stress of travelling and I think until people actually experience working on a split site school and travelling between sites at least twice a day they cannot understand the effect that this has on your teaching ability.
http://community.tes.co.uk/forums/p/273396/6658057.aspx



Head teacher Carolyn Roberts welcomed the news. She said: "It has been a constant drain on resources having two sites because classes have had to be split and teachers spend their lunch hour driving between campuses.




Operating the new academy, which is supposed and aims to coalesce two previous schools, is much more difficult on two separate sites that are well over a mile apart. Operating on two sites adds considerably to the costs and management issues and involves the duplication of a whole range of functions that simply would be unnecessary if the school were on a single site. While the site is still split into two halves, it is also difficult for the new management team, educationally I suspect, to build quickly the new ethos and purpose that they seek for a single, all-ability, co-educational school.



Looks like schools in Surrey get additional money for being in a federation or having a split site.

http://www.surrey-fire.gov.uk/sccwebsite/sccwspages.nsf/LookupWebPagesByTITLE_RTF/Split+site+factor?opendocument

But in one case in Manchester when the CC dropped this funding it put a school in massive problems.

http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/news-features/8/news/43320/head-tightens-belts-to-pay-back-369000

and in further evidence that getting the funding because you need it does not mean it will always be there see this wrangling about split site funding.

http://esi.essexcc.gov.uk/vip8/si/esi/dis/content/index.jsp?&sectionLink=true&sectionOid=308&oid=24360


Schools on split sites incur additional costs due to the loss of economies of scale...

http://www.deni.gov.uk/april_2001_consultation_split_sites_factor.pdf


Parents anger forces split-site rethink

http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/news/Parents-anger-forces-academy-split-rethink/article-2736716-detail/article.html


A school is even more likely to have to close due to snow if there is significant travel between buildings.

http://www.hu17.net/longcroft-school-to-reman-closed-on-friday/


Salesian (PJ Wilkinson said this was a success) looks like as split site disaster to me.


School Proposal Principal issues Salesian Replace existing split ...


Split site schools bad for staff

Peter Inson, who is also author of the book Dunno, told the Independent: '[I have] taught in a split-site school, which is what Mr Balls wants to create, and I would not impose this on my staff.

Commenting on reports of Government plans to force state schools into mergers or federations, Martin Johnson, deputy general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, said: 'Arranged marriage is one thing, shotgun weddings are another.



http://www.atl.org.uk/education-news/default.asp?article=%7B51E95AD5-180D-4C50-A0F6-00C99E7955D3%7D

Peter Inson - lays into Ed Balls on combining schools - bit controversial

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/peter-inson-you-wont-improve-schools-by-mixing-the-bad-with-the-good-1715933.html

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6557945.ece


That is the physical position at the lower school, but in addition there are the human dimension and the accompanying practical difficulties arising from the split site. To emphasise these genuine problems, I can do no better than quote from the Office for Standards in Education inspection report of May 1996: The school's split site poses problems for its work. The lower school buildings provide a poor learning environment…The school is part way through a phased development of its accommodation, 262designed to consolidate the school on one site and improve facilities in the future. The quality of some of the new buildings is good, for example the sixth form area and computer rooms at the upper school. However, for pupils currently in the school, the provision and standard of accommodation are unsatisfactory in a number of respects. The school occupies two sites approximately 1 km apart. The unavoidable movement of teachers, and to a lesser extent, pupils, has a negative impact on the quality of education provided. I graduated in geography some 35 years ago—a long time ago—and therefore feel for the subject, although I have forgotten most of what I learned at university.

The report continues: The extent of movements reduced teaching and preparation time; for example there are 31 such breaks in geography in each timetable cycle apart from those coinciding with breaks and lunchtimes…The lower school presents a dispiriting learning environment. This site provides little stimulus to pupils on entry to the school…Some teachers spend a high proportion of their time with only one part of the age range and this on one of the two sites. This hinders the development of consistent practices and communications…Good formal and informal communications seek to overcome the problems of having staff on two sites; the tension between seeking to reduce staff travelling and ensuring full participation in subject teams has not yet been resolved satisfactorily". The situation, then, is that time is wasted in travelling between the sites. There is stress on staff; inefficient use and duplication of equipment and materials; timetabling constraints; under-use of specialist facilities at one site and over-use at the other; and there are revenue funding implications for the local education authority and the school itself. My hon. Friend's Department has allowed £23,000 towards the school budget to try to cover the split site situation. Cornwall makes the figure up to £45,500. The governors' realistic assessment of the cost of the split site is £77,000.

The conclusions reached by the Ofsted inspection team clearly show the need to improve the position as soon as possible. One of the key issues identified by the inspectors was the need for the local education authority and the governors to

continue to seek to overcome the constraints imposed by the split site, and, in the short term, to improve the learning environment in the lower school and to integrate it more fully into the life and work of the school as a whole. The governors and the staff are attempting to do that. Certain improvements and extensions are being undertaken. I must emphasise, however, that, when those improvements are completed, the difficulties associated with a split site will still not be resolved.

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1997/mar/11/liskeard-school-and-community-college




Well well....as 'any fule know', history teaches us that we don't learn from History.
The old Ryles Park School was split site, with the lower school children educated in an old Victorian building off Byrons Street and the upper school on the Ryles Park site.

The teachers did the commuting between lessons using their own cars: I know as I was one of those teachers, though I used to ride my bike through the park in order to get to lessons.

I then moved to Wilmslow, where a similar split site system was in operation - this time initially a three way split. Again, the staff moved between lessons on a school mini bus. We had to leave our classes before the bell and arrive after the bell in order to meet the school time-table.

Often the materials books and equipment would have been left behind in the stress of this and the pupils were essentially unsupervised. I used to joke that they could play entire football matches in the travelling time, built into the time- table

Has anyone cared to ask any teacher who has operated this system of split site teaching of the benefits to the children? I doubt it.

The poor decision-making about Macclesfield schools, goes back thirty years with the necessity to provide a Grammar School education for boys, when Kings discontinued the offer of 'selling' places to the County. Fallibroome was the school built to fill this gap Its geographical location on the South West side of town, adjacent to Henbury High, was a mistake and at that point, the 'Grammar School boys could have been educated at Ryles Park.

Does this brief history lesson explain the cynicism I feel?

The decision to merge the two schools into one, and to operate a split -site has nothing to do with the desire to provide good, better or best education in Macclesfield.

My own advice? leave the schools as they are. Bring in special measures (and with it extra cash) for Macc High. The parents of children in Sutton, Gawsworth and Langley who currently bus their children to primary schools round the county in order to get them into other schools will want them to go to Macc High.

I am available for consultation, should the various bodies wish to have a first hand account of the experience of split site education

http://menmedia.co.uk/macclesfieldexpress/news/s/1243103_takeover_means_the_end_for_macclesfield_high



The college is strongly led by the principal, whose vision for, and commitment to, the students is shared by the senior leadership team and the staff, who work purposefully to overcome the difficulties which the college's split site presents.


I taught at Grove last year and attended many of Ms Johnsons staff planning meetings and she got of to a bad start with many staff members that got progressively worse. For the merger and split site to work it needs the whole staff to pull together to make it workable. Now that she has stepped aside maybe this can happen.

I know that many of my former colleagues were disillusioned with what was happening and the lack of leadership that was being shown. Hopefully some of the 19 teachers that were resigning at xmas can be persuaded to stay on and create the succesful acadamy that the community deserves.
----
they should of listened to what everyone wanted ,we didnt want the schools to join,to one big mass school,and certainly not backed by a christan backed charity,the council should of kept the school in their hands,at the end of the day its all about money,when it should be about happy kids and good teachers.
----
I think she resigned because of stresses.. but most people would expect to be put under stress when becoming the head teacher of 2 merged schools.
---

http://www.thisishampshire.net/archive/2008/11/24/++News+-++Latest+Headlines/3872026.Head_of_troubled_Oasis_academy_quits/



Often there was insufficient planning and preparation leading to inherently chaotic forms of organisation such as split-site schools. In many areas teachers and pupils found themselves almost overnight in almost unrecognisable institutions with new colleagues new teachers and new classmates.
http://www.campaignforstateeducation.org.uk/Comprehensive%20Success%20Story.pdf 


will add more as time permits

PAN research

Disputes over the schools admissions policy can be ruled on by
http://www.schoolsadjudicator.gov.uk/index.cfm

Interestingly complaints for Surrey LEA "Non compliant with code" are a huge block - perhaps its just cos Surrey has a lot of people?

http://www.schoolsadjudicator.gov.uk/decisions_all.cfm?order=lea&type_of_school=0&year=0&casetype=all#temp2

Its possibly worth a browse round this site to see if anyone gets a clearer view of what sort of things the Schools Adjudicator deals with.

PAN can be revised downward.

http://www.cheshirewestandchester.gov.uk/education_and_learning/parents/school_admissions/school_admission_arrangements/consultation_2012_arrangements/proposed_pan_changes.aspx


http://www.derbyshire.gov.uk/council/have_your_say/consultation_search/Consultation_search_index/schools_admission_arrangements_for_201112.asp

Its been part of debates in Parliament




Mark Lancaster: The hon. Member comes to the nub of the problem-how we square that circle between the rights of schools to set their own admissions and the
13 Dec 2010 : Column 790
rights of families to get their children into their local school. In Milton Keynes, the consequence is that new families moving in cannot get a place at their local school.

Network Rail's new headquarters is set to bring 2,000 new staff to the city. Yes, there will be school places for the children who move here, but will these be anywhere near their houses and how long will they have to wait to start? This situation also spells trouble as we see the creation of more academies. In Milton Keynes, two schools have applied for academy status, which I wholeheartedly support. I am delighted about it, but will they, as in the previous case, have reduced PANs and will we see yet more displacement within the city?


I get a sniff here that suggests there might be something in Academy status that means they can set their own PAN. If that is so then could Tomlinscote go Academy and do it? Is the merger in response to the fact Collingwood may be able to change its PAN? Flying a kite here but might be worth a browse.

Teacher Stress and School Merger - KH

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a739596685

55% of such mergers resulted in a decline in exam results - KH

And this does not even include the split site problem....

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23371813-school-mergers-can-worsen-results.do


More than half of school mergers lead to a drop in exam results, according to new research.
Ministers want to encourage more successful schools to form federations with weaker schools in an effort to drive up standards, but research from the Hay Group consultancy firm found 55% of such mergers resulted in a decline in exam results over the first three years.
The study examined both federations between two schools and formal mergers where two schools become one.
Russell Hobby, the education consultant at Hay Group responsible for the research, said: "As the corporate sector shows, mergers are complex and problematic transactions.
"Schools need resources and support to navigate the cultural as well as logistical challenges a merger presents. The number of schools faltering following a merger is worryingly high, and with more mergers planned, this could affect thousands of students."
The findings varied between primary and secondary education, with 68% of merged secondary schools seeing an ongoing drop in performance.
Half of primary schools experienced a sustained decline in academic results after a merger.
The research was based on a detailed study of 73 mergers over the last six years, involving a total of 207 schools.
The study drew parallels with the private sector, where 50-70% of corporate mergers and acquisitions fail to deliver on their objectives, and share price falls by 10% on average in the first year after a merger, but the Hay Group said decline was not the inevitable consequence of a merger, with one fifth (21%) of merged schools immediately improving performance.
More than a quarter - 28% - of schools experienced a one or two-year decline following a merger, but then recovered.

Friday, 1 April 2011

Frimley Park Hospital

I'm sure that we have quite a few healthcare professionals in our midst.  I think we need to make the hospital management and staff aware that this proposal could gridlock the traffic twice a day.  If someone has the contacts to be able to get the Management of Frimley Park Hospital to ask SurreyCC how they intend to deal with it that would be nice.

Change to Michael Gove question time panel.

If the people who are going to this meeting with an interest in the Tomlinscote-Kings Merger could email me tomlinscote.kings@gmail.com putting GOVE MEETING in the subject I'll put together an email list so we can coordinate potential questions.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Cllr Rodney Bates <rodney.bates@surreyheath.gov.uk>
Date: Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 7:55 PM
Subject: Question event
To: tomlinscote.kings@gmail.com


Hi


I have been asked by Cathie Russell of Connect Christian Counselling Service to contact you regarding the question time event with Michael Gove which is taking place next Friday evening at High Cross Church.


She has been made aware that some publicity has gone round with the "old" panel including on the Council's website and that as a result, some people may mistakenly believe that Tony Ryles will be appearing at the event. This is not correct and the actual panel will be as follows:-


Rodney Bates, Surrey Heath Labour Councillor


Andy Brooks, General Practitioner


John May, Mayor, Surrey Heath


Juliette May, Mayoress, Surrey Heath


David Harris, Head, Ravenscote Junior School


The change of panel is because the event was originally scheduled for a few weeks ago but had to be postponed due to another commitment that Michael Gove had. The previously advertised speakers (including Tony Ryles) will not be attending.


This event is still open to people to attend but Cathie would be grateful if you could make people aware of the panel change through your website in light of the wider interest on the proposed schools merger. The theme for the evening is the "Big Society" although I understand that there is likely to be an opportunity for local issues to be raised. The contact details for tickets and all other info remains unchanged.


Regards


Cllr Rodney Bates


Old Dean Ward

Reply to Anon re conflicts of interest.

Anonymous said...


It seems to me that you are denigrating the very things that make Tomlinscote the school with such an excellent reputation that you and everyone else so desperately wants their child/children to attend. You can't have it both ways. How can you possibly insinuate that a good working relationship between Governors and Mr Ryles is a bad thing? Do you not understand that it is vitally important that the Governors and the Head work hand and hand or nothing would get done?

It is also an insult to suggest that Mr Ryles doesn't have the best interest of Tomlinscote students at heart, it is very fortunate for all students in the area that he is generous enough to think that Tomlinscote is able to give all of them the benefit of a good education by taking over Kings International not just those that are fortunate enough to get into Tomlinscote. You seem to be implying that only your child should have the opportunity to receive an excellent education. Your call for Mr Ryles to step down is an abomination and I think that if you are so unhappy with Tomlinscote with him as the Head, you should take your child out of the school and enroll him in a school that you think will give him a better education, perhaps Gordon's would be more to your liking.


I suggested Mr Ryles to step down and take no further part in the "merger" i.e. take "gardening leave" before retirement.  I will not discuss this on-line any further and suggest nobody else does either.  For anyone who feels strongly on the subject one way or the other, a more appropriate course of action would be to contact the Chairman of the Governors privately.

I think that I was quite glowing about both Mr Ryles' achievements and abilities wrt. Tomlinscote, I will add for the sake of completeness that by all accounts the application of his considerable abilities to Kings has also been effective despite the short / shortened time he has been there.

In terms of his relationship with the governors, the governors are effectively the board of a company.  In this case one with many millions of pounds flowing through it and the fate over the years of thousands of childrens educations.  The requirement is that the governors prosecute their business in a professional and civil manner, if they enjoy their jobs that is good.  It is neither a requirement nor an obstacle if they enjoy each others company but it can be a complication.  Friendships within business do not usually cause concern but they can be somewhat divisive when they are placed within the confines of a voting committee.  A voting committee is supposed to have "one man one vote" any close relationships that are formed, cliques or groups, perverts this structure. 

Mr Ryles has said that he is stepping down because it is only right for the New Head to be in charge of the restructuring project.  IF it is true (as we keep on being told) that this is a consultation then surely the New Head should participate in the task of deciding if he thinks a merger is the best idea - then he will be partly responsible for the decision.  If the merger is forced through against parents wishes whoever does it is likely to be highly unpopular so it is more convenient that this be someone who does not stay to "face the music".

I'll also answer the other point you make about the educational provision for my child.  My child receives an excellent education from the teachers at Tomlinscote, which is 4 minutes walk, if I was 4 minutes walk from Kings I imagine I'd send them there, and by all accounts get some excellent teachers there too.

Nothing in the proposals convinces me that Kings is not capable of being a viable and well respected school, nothing I've seen yet convinces me it needs to close.  I believe that a "soft federation" between the schools is good but that an upper and lower school on two sites (separated by a traffic blackspot) raises so many educational difficulties its not in the interests of any of the children.  I believe the restructure will cause such chaos that any child setting foot in the combined school in the next 4-5 years will have their education materially affected.  Still worse if SurreyCCs own population predictions are true the school will shortly afterward go through ANOTHER period of massive change as it gets bigger.

Send my children to Gordons? If you knew me you'd laugh!

Meetings Update (Tomlinscote) - Claire Funnell

Following attendance at the Tomlinscote Consultation meetings on Wednesday night, I t was suggested that I might like to update my previous blog.

It is true to say there was a massive contrast between the two meetings, but none-the-less the message was clear that we, as parents, do not wish for this merger/absorption to happen.

I stayed for the whole 4 hours and I was glad I did as although contrasting arguments and opinions were raised, it was clear that we are united in one goal – to keep Kings and Tomlinscote separate for the right reasons for all of our children.

Having a year 5 child, it dawned on me that the effect that this would have on him is probably more concerning than that of my older year 7 son. We will be making choices based on a school and school ethos that doesn’t yet exist or Collingwood. Based on this choice, we would be stupid not to choose Collingwood? With all “PAN” of 775 parents choosing Collingwood as 1st preference, parents like myself who historically would have had a choice between the two larger schools (because of our location) and Kings (because of space spaces) , will be allocated to our second choice as Collingwood will be oversubscribed . 2nd choice being – no choice. Many year 5 parents are not even aware of the detail and are thinking that the decision making does not affect them. It so does.

On Monday morning I was a parent who was concerned, but had faith that the decisions would be made based on what is best for the education of the children in Surrey Heath. As I have absorbed more information over this week, my opinions have changed. I believe that the decisions are based, on the whole, on financial savings and politics, and have very little to do with education.

Since I wrote the article for the blog earlier in the week, I have had numerous emails, many with the same message – “I would really like to think that there was something that I/we could do to stop this, but I think the decision has been made/I think this is a done deal.” I do not agree.

Between the two schools we have over 2000 sets of parents who apparently feel exactly the same way as me and you. I have not heard of one person (with the exception of the men on the stage) who thinks that this is a good idea, especially now , as more facts are emerging. If you would like to be part of the fight against this, then you should make yourself known to Ian (blog administrator), so that interested parties can begin to work together. It is unlikely that 1 or 2 people will make a difference, but 2000 + really can.  

It may well be that our views and opinions will be dismissed and this will be pushed through but we owe it to our own children, and all children of Tomlinscote and Kings, to become an organised and united front to make our voices heard.