Fuschia

Sorry that was completely the wrong link, lol ... Was supposed to be a different one, blame my iPhone, hang on

kittysailing Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Having been a lone 'bright kid' ( only one in year > to go to Uni) in a rough comp in the North I would > say manipulating the intake by fair banding seems > like a good thing. Having an academic mix in the > school and providing each child with academic > 'peers' is surely better for individual children. > Or am I missing the point? It's a very good idea. I believe it was how Ilea used to operate for all schools. However in the current context, it's used pretty much exclusively by a acAdemies who can the report rapidly improving results, while the remaining schools often see their levels of prior attainment on entry fall

That's exactly it ... 'fair banding' If a school is oversubscribed and other schools are not operating the same policy, a school can improve its intake in this way. After all, if children were fairly distributed across all schools, the governments targets would be met. It's just at the moment schools don't all get a balanced intake.

http://www.echarris.com/pdf/8286_Case%20Study_West%20London%20Free%20School_Final.pdf

'? Is Harris Federation a charity or a business? The annual report for 2010 shows that the Harris Federation has a turnover of ?130 million. It employs 1,157 people. Whilst for legal, and perhaps moral reasons it presents as a charity (it was made an exempt charity in August 2011 so it no longer has to publish accounts with the charity Commission) its operations make it appear much more like a business. It runs two separate but connected business arms Harris Academies Project Management Limited ?The company is used for construction work on a number of Harris Federation academy buildings.?? Made ?337,000 profit. HCTC Enterprises limited ?The company is used to carry on business as a general commercial company?. It operates the Lewis Sports and Leisure Centre and made ?23,000 profit.' From One of the links I posted

Snap, edmummy -yet son hyper mobile too (as am I)

Ds1 Initially Placed in An occupational therapy group for DCD but then diagnosed instead with Sensory processing disorder, which has some overlap ...if that helps? Pm me if so...

Actually you are wrong on a number of points there - google lacseg for instance Unfortunately I haven't got time to unpick it right this minute, syopised to be working on my day job (which us school funding and leadership!) I don't have a particular axe to grind against Harris. They don't do a bad job. But they don't work miracles either. To return briefly to free schools though. How can it be right that to initiate a new school, parents are exhorted to express an interest via The Internet? Why is this no longer a matter of strategic planning for local government? That's why I think it is political dogma gone mad, and is what has left us with no cooed secondary places accessible to ED.

James, how much money has the govt wasted on doing the ground work on setting up free schools, where initial expressions of interest didn't turn into actual bums on seats? Very large sums is the answer. Also as distance is usually the main factor for school admissions, and for primary in particular, many of these 'expressions of interest' will be for children who have no hope of getting a place at a school on the old hospital site. No one could say that Gove's expensive and wasteful free school dogma is a rational way to plan the future provision of education in the area! Or that the whole initiative isn't diverting vital funds away from existing schools.

Plus conversion costs where existing schools are taken on by a chain... Think that's ?65k minimum now?

http://www.localschoolsnetwork.org.uk/2011/10/academy-conversions-have-cost-millions-?-and-cost-is-likely-to-escalate/

Something from NAO http://www.localschoolsnetwork.org.uk/2012/11/academies-programme-cost-1-billion-more-than-anticipated-says-nao/

I was taking into account the building costs. The slice of funding allocated to the academies to compensate for loss of services in general is higher than comparable funding for the schools remaining with the LA. I do have some links but not sure I will have time to dig them out just now.

But there are many schools also doing that. And this year a never of Harrus academies saw their overall % drop. I think they are not bad schools, if you accept the ethos, but should they should be for the money they have cost! What they are not is some panacea 'turn a school into an academy and results will go up' It's not proven, despite the press onslaught in favour of academies and the toadying of Gove's cronies at OFSTED

Some stuff here about how fair banding will push up results http://www.lynnejones.org.uk/lynne-jones-mp/dcsf%20letters.htm

Lm, await the information when Published for 2012 results and showing the effects of reducing the equivalent courses I am Not saying The academies are rubbish, but they are not a magic wand, despite the huge cost of them (money diverted away from las and la schools)

The academy sponsors in some cases contributed no capital to the schools I don't believe the incredible salaries for the bosses are reasonable or justified Many community schools pay similar sakarues to their actual teachers, without amending teachers conditions of service and working hours It's privatisation, political dogma, concealed behind the rhetoric of school improvement and an attack on the state education system as great as the attack on the health service

Jobs for the boys: http://m.flickr.com/lightbox?id=8221881250

Lm, their improved results are to a large extent achieved by virtue of the fair banding admissions, increased exclusions and gcse equivalents. But my main objection is one of principle. I object to schools Nd their sites being given away without democratic choice by local people, to line the pickets of cronies of the Tories. It's an incestuous map of back slapping

http://eoin-clarke.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/3-academy-school-chains-hand-164-staff.html?m=1 If the director of an la responsible for 300-400 schools and social services for children earns around ?150k, what justifies Daniel Moynihan earning so much more, for fewer than 20 schools?

James, you are very naive, for a politician!

Some scary stuff about the Harris machine http://antiacademies.org.uk/2012/03/harris-federation-spotlight-on-sponsors/

Harris does now pay ?300k This press report was a year ago http://m.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/nov/14/academies-pay-200k-salaries

Salaries for the bosses of the biggest academy chains, at ?300k, are double those of director of children's services in a LA

I would always choose the head end and share the other end, if given the chance!!