traveller1

At the risk is staying the obvious, that is why so many parent information meetings have been scheduled. You will find fellow parents aplenty to ask their opinions at one of them.?

not me. kids having fun are the least of my problems with the station. More than one functioning ticket machine would be nice.

I think ?5 is a bit low for babysitting. We pay teenagers $6 an hour in the evening and ?8 after school. Sometimes my husband does walk them home (if local) because we (and their parents) are uncomfortable with putting them in a minicab alone at night. I would never use a 'young' teen for a late night or one that is a bit further afield. I'm always surprised that people are willing to underpay someone who is tasked with looking after their children. We have had many different babysitters over the years and the ones that i really like, I definitely pay more to hold on to. We have been very fortunate that we have had lovely and, crucially, reliable babysitters over the years. I would suggest that your daughter turn down future jobs as there is plenty of demand out there for good babysitters!

My girls are there this week and it is, as always, excellent. You can book through the website: www.dulwichkids.com

I will no longer go to Le C either as was turned away with my aunt and two girls (8 and 10) because the only seats were near the front of the cafe. As there are lots of other choices around East Dulwich, I see no point in going back.

The traffic flow has been greatly improved over the last two days so whatever has been done it is certainly making a huge difference.

Decathlon - much cheaper.

Where do I find the information on the Crystal Palace event on Friday? Thanks,

Metallic you are not interested in 'schools' but in a school. I think you perhaps should cast your net a bit wider if you are genuinely looking for the right school for your child. There are many other secondary schools to seeks further information about, discuss, query, cast a critical eye over - as we all do when going through the process. However, you only ever seem interested on 1 school. Odd.

What - now the Evening Standard is a co-conspirator in an ever expanding coverup? Suggest you come back down to planet earth, it's a secondary school not Watergate.

James - you express doubt that the new head (and his team) were able to accurately comment on the state of the school after a few months yet you are quite happy to accept the results of a 2 day inspection - funny. Not to mention that you are happy to discount the assessment of those of us with children at the school. It is even clearer to me now why I simply have no faith in those currently responsible for governing the school and clearly local councillors cannot be relied upon as honest brokers either....

Yes well done to all etc but really James Barber your shameless attempt to validate your earlier (and erroneous) support for the incompetent Head teacher sums up why, I feel, your are such a poor representative for the community. As all of the parents who went to the meeting with the new (and extremely competent) head teacher were told, it was his feeling that had the Ofsted inspection taken place when it should have (in the early autumn) that the school would have been put into special measures. So, in fact, the journey has not been one of progressive improvement but one of improvement, regression and now, thank goodness, improvement again. Why does any of this matter? Because the problem of accountability has not been solved. The local authority, the governing body and clearly the management failed miserably during the tenure of the previous head and it was only the fact the she chose to move on to a new position that led to the current Head teacher coming in and making rapid improvements. It is my opinion that the currently arrangements for governance do not work and for all that we are told about the importance of parental involvement, there is very little that can be done to hold management accountable for bad practice. So yes, Goodrich has an excellent Head teacher now but what happens the next time someone is not doing his or her job effectively? Clearly the answer is Nothing. For those of us who sat in meetings with the LEA and their various consultants being told how everything, despite appearances, was fabulous, only to be told a few months later that the school was on the verge of being put into special measures and that our children were significantly under performing in certain areas, it is hard not to feel cynical. And let us remember, it is the children who have been let down previously and I wish I felt more confident that it won't happen again but I don't.

I don't think that my assessment of the current head's professional ability is at all personal -- she may in fact be a nice person but that has nothing to do with my opinion of her performance as a Head Teacher. I have made my judgements based on how she has run the school and I have, in fact, taken up the issues with the appropriate and relevant authorities and have not posted those opinions on this forum until now. Why now? Well read this thread. There have been cruel assumptions about not just the govenor involved in this particular incident but about large swathes of the parents at the school. I am just trying to demonstrate that many parents are unhappy with her performance in many areas of managing the school and are well within their rights to air this dissatisfaction. Management must be held accountable for their decisions - that is the essence of democracy. I would not have wanted to see this incident reported in the press but it has been. ONCE again, the poster advertised a meeting between parents and parent govenors (not the head) and in its context was funny and never threatening. And if it was felt to be so by the head than she should have dealt with the issue in a more constructive manner. She called the police and therefore put it in the public domain. Again, that was her decision and she should be held accountable for it. Given that some of the wild assumptons and assertions made on this forum are so off the mark I felt it was important to put the incident in context. This are not 'personal' issues with the head but are my assessment of her performance. An assessment that I am well within my rights to make.

I have children at both Goodrich (under the current and previous head) and Kingsdale and I am not afraid to say that I think that the current head at Goodrich is awful. That is an asssessment that I feel that I am both entitled and well placed to make. It has absolute nothing to do with the colour of her skin or her gender but is based on my dealings with her over the period of time of her headship. She has demonstrated - in my opinion - not just poor judgement but indequate management skills and dreadful communication skills. That is the source of parents anger and it neither irrational nor racist. When you have an issue with your child and you need it addressd and dealt with than you travel though the various levels of engagement (teachers, phase leaders and ultimately to the head). Unfortunately almost everyone that I know that has had to deal with the current head has not been satisfied with her performance (to say the least)and has walked away feeling not just dissatisfied but even angrier and more anxious than they were to begin with. Not a sign of effective management. Also, what does it say about an individuals (in this case parents)ability to hold public institutions to account if they are immediately disenfranchised by being deemed a racist? Or by threats that any complaint may result in an individual suing for damages. Of course any employee or citizen should be protected from unfair treatment based on their race, religion, gender, sexual orientation and so on. But it is patronizing and insulting to the current head to conclude that any criticism of her performance must be based on the colour of her skin. Believe me - when it comes to criticism of the current head you will be happy to discover that it cuts across racial, class and any other kind of boundary you could think up. And should those in positions of authority be protected from those who are dissatified with their performance? I cetainly hope not. Contrast that with the head of Kingsdale who, in addition to being an excellent manager and inspirational head, has a wonderful working relationship with the parents at the school. The poster in question, as has been noted over and over again, was advertising a meeting of the Parents Forum (parents and parent governors) and didn't even involve the current Head. It is also interesting to note that although the police were called because she found the poster so threatening, she still left it hanging up in the school for the following 6 weeks and it was only removed to be replaced with a poster for a PTA cake sale. Most people who saw it found it quite funny, understanding that parents were unhappy with both the head and the governing body of the school. It depicted an anrgy mob, not a racist mob. There had been no previous suggestion that the head felt she had been the victim of racist behaviour and she had every opportunity to bring the matter up with the governor in question. She chose to call the police and therefore must be willing to be held responsbile for her actions - that is the essence of accountability. And finally - SHAME on you James Barber for suggesting that SATS results have anything to do with secondary school admissions, particulary during a period of time when people are agonizing over the availability of places as it is. SATS results have absolutely nothing to do with the application to secondary schools and aren't even used for banding purposes. I suggest that you check your facts first and adjust the resolution on your computer before you jump on any futher political bandwagons (once, of course, you've licked your finger and checked what you think are the prevailing winds of public opinion). Outrageous.