Jump to content

Recommended Posts

To DaveR


Sorry but if you want to get the equivalent of a private education by the way of Academy you are in dream land. Academies are the privatisation of education through the back door. That is why Gove is doing it on the quiet. They give the schools the hook of the big chunk of money to start whith and then what? Is McDonals going to come to the academies rescue as and when Mr. Gove decides there is not enough money on the pot for academies? perhaps we will end paying for what was free before.(Sorry not free because after all we already pay for education via the tax system).

Also what do Academies do with all those children that are failing for whatever reason in order to get their excellent results??? I know some Academies are failing.


If you are not happy with Goodrich you should start working for the school and stop your patronising of the teachers.

LynP -

Yes an Academy by it's very nature can provide the equipment that makes it very attractive but what good is that without fantastic teachers?


Spot on with your remark about teachers , not that Academy status will guarantee good teaching .

But the first part of your remark is a misconception I think .

Maybe the additional freedom to juggle their own budget will enable Goodrich to buy extra equipment ,but there won't be any additional money ,so it will be robbing Peter to pay Paul .


AFAIK these new style Academies will receive ?25,000 for legal and organisational costs involved in converting .


To me that's money merely for the sake of administrative reform . Where does that money come from ? Surely it could be more gainfully spent elsewhere ?


The Academy movement is a political act ,privatising and further fragementing our education system .

That contextual valud added means Goodrich is in the top 25% of primary schools in the country.


Could it improve of course. Can it improve as quickly as a much smaller school of course not.


If parents are for or against the proposal by the school governors for Goodwich to beocme an academy they should be properly informed and allowed to vote on it. If they decide yes (which personally I think is sad but ineviatble and rather a matter of when) they should then vote on which school to federate with, with each selling itself to the parents.


If the governors don't follow such a democratic path I would encourage parents to organise a petition perhaps online and submit that to the secretary of state with personal letters with their views - I'd be hopeful a Secretary of State who is the final decision maker on schools becoming Academies would not allow such a change if parents had clearly expressed a contrary view.


Written like a true democrat.

"If parents are for or against the proposal by the school governors for Goodwich (sic) to beocme an academy they should be properly informed and allowed to vote on it. If they decide yes ... they should then vote on which school to federate with, with each selling itself to the parents."


How does that square with your assertion that the Governors were too slow to react to the offer from Kingsdale James?:


"And I can confirm Kingsdale did ask Goodrich and two other schools earlier this year whether they would like to federate with them - the other two schools had emergency governor meeings within 24hours and fed back their responses within 24hours. Goodrich governors did not treat this offer with urgency and I'd be amazed if they didn't burn of some goodwill in the process."


The Governors are now consulting with the parents, we are in the process. It does seem inevitable that there will be more and more Academies across the country, since this is the stated aim of the present Government. I am not happy about it (and sceptical that it will achieve the magic Outstanding rating for Goodrich within two years).


More than anything I'd like to see more consistency in the teaching at the school, more long-serving teachers, less staff turnover. My daughter has been at the school since Nursery and has had eight teachers in that time, only three of whom are still there.

Dorothy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> "The Governors are now consulting with the parents,

> we are in the process"


"How are the parent governors consulting the parents at Goodrich? I am a parent at Goodrich and have not been consulted.

>

Letters have been handed out a few times this week (they've arrived home in my son's Pact bag). We got another one today saying the meeting scheduled for next Tuesday has now been postponed until the start of the Autumn term "so that we can all thoroughly prepare, and give you more detailed information. It will also give us time to take on board your feedback and incorporate responses to that in the next meetings".


Very sensible, here's hoping the meetings later in the year are more informative and conducted in a more constructive manner.

Oh noooo - now I'm completely naive about this (and all things educational really), but what does this mean (if anything) for the school? And (being self-interested) for the new intake in September?


Do they just get a locum in, or does it mean a greater meltdown/special measures type scenario?


As you can see COMPLETELY clueless!

It's very late for a resignation

(edited to day) a headteacher needs to give 3 months notice - end of April


Either this is a late announcement of an earlier resignation or there is something of a crisis - and the previous head has resigned with no new job to go to


Or has she resigned with effect fro

November?


A temporary head will need to be found to cover.


I guess governors will recruit later on with a headteacher who is keen to run an academy

Quote Dulwich_Park_Fairy :- My understanding is that a small group of Parent Governors are behind this initiative and very much question the legitimacy of what they have done.


Quote Fuschia :- I guess governors will recruit later on with a headteacher who is keen to run an academy.



Maybe this time the 'self appointed inner circle' on the Board of Governors will work with the appointed head of school in all respects.

I am not an expert in these matters but I have been a governor in a school in the past. Headteachers come and go, and the main thing is just to appoint a replacement in calm and orderly way. It seems there is a lot of hysteria around Goodrich. It is a decent school and presumably the best thing is to let the governors, if this post is true, to just appoint a really good new headteacher.
As parents of the school (which I think the majority on this thread are) it's important to be positive, and see the change as a good thing for the school. Here's hoping a great new head is found who will help the school move onwards and upwards. I haven't had many dealings with Shirley, but on the couple of occasions I met her to speak to I found her very friendly and wish her the best.

James Barber Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The Academy tide is very strong. The powers

> governors have as an academy are stronger.

> So the key is probably how well respected the

> governors of this school are.

>



Thanks James.


I believe the current Governors are strong and if you ask how well respected they are, then I for one respect them fully and expect them to achieve the best long term outcome for the school.

If the reports of allegations in the South London Press are correct, if federated with Goodrich, Kingsdale might have some useful pointers to give to the governors of Goodrich for improving exam results/pushing Goodrich up the league tables towards the coveted 'outstanding' status?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • why do we think we have the right for the elected local council to be transparent?
    • Granted Shoreditch is still London, but given that the council & organisers main argument for the festival is that it is a local event, for local people (to use your metaphor), there's surprisingly little to back this up. As Blah Blah informatively points out, this is now just a commercial venture with no local connection. Our park is regarded by them as an asset that they've paid to use & abuse. There's never been any details provided of where the attendees are from, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's never been any details provided of any increase in sales for local businesses, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's promises of "opportunities" for local people & traders to work at the festival, but, again, no figures to back this up. And lastly, the fee for the whole thing goes 100% to running the Events dept, and the dozens of free events that no-one seems able to identify, and, yes, you guessed it - no details provided for by the council. So again, no tangible benefit for the residents of the area.
    • I mean I hold no portfolio to defend Gala,  but I suspect that is their office.  I am a company director,  my home address is also not registered with Companies House. Also guys this is Peckham not Royston Vasey.  Shoreditch is a mere 20 mins away by train, it's not an offshore bolt hole in Luxembourg.
    • While it is good that GALA have withdrawn their application for a second weekend, local people and councillors will likely have the same fight on their hands for next year's event. In reading the consultation report, I noted the Council were putting the GALA event in the same light as all the other events that use the park, like the Circus, the Fair and even the FOPR fete. ALL of those events use the common, not the park, and cause nothing like the level of noise and/or disruption of the GALA event. Even the two day Irish Festival (for those that remember that one) was never as noisy as GALA. So there is some disingenuity and hypocrisy from the Council on this, something I wll point out in my response to the report. The other point to note was that in past years branches were cut back for the fencing. Last year the council promised no trees would be cut after pushback, but they seem to now be reverting to a position of 'only in agreement with the council's arbourist'. Is this more hypocrisy from 'green' Southwark who seem to once again be ok with defacing trees for a fence that is up for just days? The people who now own GALA don't live in this area. GALA as an event began in Brockwell Park. It then lost its place there to bigger events (that pesumably could pay Lambeth Council more). One of the then company directors lived on the Rye Hill Estate next to the park and that is likely how Peckham Rye came to be the new choice for the event. That person is no longer involved. Today's GALA company is not the same as the 'We Are the Fair' company that held that first event, not the same in scope, aim or culture. And therein lies the problem. It's not a local community led enterprise, but a commercial one, underwritten by a venture capital company. The same company co-run the Rally Event each year in Southwark Park, which btw is licensed as a one day event only. That does seem to be truer to the original 'We Are the Fair' vision, but how much of that is down to GALA as opoosed to 'Bird on the Wire' (the other group organising it) is hard to say.  For local people, it's three days of not being able to open windows, As someone said above, if a resident set up a PA in their back garden and subjected the neighbours to 10 hours of hard dance music every day for three days, the Council would take action. Do not underestimate how distressing that is for many local residents, many of whom are elderly, frail, young, vulnerable. They deserve more respect than is being shown by those who think it's no big deal. And just to be clear, GALA and the council do not consider there to be a breach of db level if the level is corrected within 15 minutes of the breach. In other words, while db levels are set as part of the noise management plan, there is an acknowledgement that a breach is ok if corrected within 15 minutes. That is just not good enough. Local councillors objected to the proposed extension. 75% of those that responded to the consultation locally did not want GALA 26 to take place at all. For me personally, any goodwill that had been built up through the various consultations over recent years was erased with that application for a second weekend, and especially given that when asked if there were plans for that in post 2025 event feedback meetings (following rumours), GALA lied and said there were no plans to expand. I have come to the conclusion that all the effort to appease on some things is merely an exercise in show, to get past the council's threshold for the events licence. They couldn't give a hoot in reality for local people, and people that genuinely care about parkland, don't litter it with noisy festivals either.   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...