Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: wabbit Aug 24 2010, 12:44 PM

I've just read the GCSE results for local schools (which were very good) but was shocked to see that Trinity School had a pass rate of 44% of pupils achieving 5 or more A-C grades including English and Maths.

By my 'O' level maths calculations , that means that 56% (er, more than half!) really could be said to have under-achieved - especially compared to other local schools such as St Barts and Park House.

Why is Trinity such a poorly performing school, especially as I understood that it had funding from Vodafone (?) and a new 'super head' in Paul *****(who performed such wonders with Kennet).

* He's even had his name censored!!

Posted by: JeffG Aug 24 2010, 01:07 PM

The different catchment areas probably have a lot to do with it.

Posted by: DrPepper Aug 24 2010, 01:07 PM

At least Trinity school's results mean that for once John O'Gaunt is bottom of the pile

Back to a previous thread - this clearly shows the head, Mr D, isn't earning the wage he is commanding.

Posted by: blackdog Aug 24 2010, 04:12 PM

"TRINITY School, in Shaw, is celebrating its best GCSE results since opening 10 years ago.
Today’s (Thursday) results show that the pass rate for five A* to C grades has jumped to 52 per cent, up 20 per cent on last year.
And the pass rate for five A* to C grades, including the core subjects of English and maths, was 44 per cent."
http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/news/Article.aspx?articleID=10885

And Kennet has the best results from any of the area's state schools.

In what way is Mr **** failing?

Posted by: DrPepper Aug 24 2010, 04:32 PM

He is failing in that more than half the pupils at the school have effectively failed at Maths & English. A 20% increase on a previously pitiful figure is nothing to be proud off - it's the overall end result that counts. I'll exaggerate to make a point - if two pupils had passed last year, and four this year that would be 100% increase, would that be cause great celebration

Basically Trinity was bottom of the "charts" last year and bottom this year, where is the improvement? And it's not like it's a difference of just a few percentage points - it's a million miles away from the rest.

Posted by: wabbit Aug 24 2010, 05:02 PM

I'm not suggesting Mr D. is failing - he's a brilliant head and a very charismatic and inspirational leader who completely turned round Kennet School. What does concern me is that if even Mr D. cannot turn around this school, what hope is there?

By the way, I was referring in my original post to the following quote - also from the NWN news section:

Forty-four per cent of pupils achieved five or more A* to C grades, including English and maths, and 96 per cent of pupils attained one or more more A* to G grade.

Actually, it's all very confusingly reported... but it's still pretty depressing reading as far as I can see.

Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 24 2010, 05:49 PM

I suppose it would be a good idea to compare results with the national average for Full Course GCSE results, 2010.

A* - 07.5 (07.1)
A -- 15.1 (14.5)
B -- 20.6 (19.9)
C -- 25.9 (25.6)
D -- 15.9 (16.5)
E -- 07.8 (08.5)
F -- 04.0 (04.4)
G -- 01.9 (02.1)
U -- 01.3 (01.4)

69.1% achieved C or better. I don't know if this is like for like with the NWN.

Posted by: On the edge Aug 24 2010, 06:43 PM

Well it takes a bit of time to turn round a school or indeed any establishment! Even Mr D would need time. Nevertheless, Trinity results are far better than what they have been in the past - so something is beginning to happen. I too would love to see instant results. For instance, given the amount of money we've just pumped into rebuilding St Barts to make a 'better learning environment' their results should really have been in the 'top twenty' nationally at least. We always have next year! Well done and keep at it Trinity.

Posted by: DrPepper Aug 24 2010, 07:11 PM

20% isn't far better, just a "bit better" - it means one in five pupils have improved, or four out of five haven't. And the school (along with the John O'Gaunt) is still well below average.

"Well done and keep at it Trinity", yep keep failing more than half your students, keep paying stupid wages for a part time head, keep congratulating yourself and keep on convincing yourself your are doing a good job.

And where is Mr D on this very important day for the school, seems he wasn't available for comment - why?

Saying that, very well done to the students who have done well at Trinity this year, they have done exceptionally well in the given circumstances.

Posted by: Torchy Aug 24 2010, 08:05 PM

West Berks league table:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/leaguetables/6980182/GCSE-league-tables-South-East.html

And Park House isn't doing much better than Trinity...

Posted by: DrPepper Aug 24 2010, 08:10 PM

#

That's last years results....

Posted by: Torchy Aug 24 2010, 08:18 PM

True.

Posted by: JeffG Aug 24 2010, 08:54 PM

What, even before the new building is finished and occupied?

Posted by: spartacus Aug 24 2010, 09:03 PM

I guess you're a 'glass half empty' kinda guy....?

Posted by: On the edge Aug 24 2010, 09:47 PM

And why not! The reply was in response to a suggestion that a dramatic improvement should have occurred at Trinity this year because a 'super head' had been appointed. So if he's not to be given any time to effect a turnaround why should the investment in a new building not be expected to deliver immediate results as well.

Posted by: DrPepper Aug 25 2010, 07:32 AM

Very well reasoned argument there, a non-existent building should produce results

A "super head", think we can just call him average head now, or with these results below average head as the school is well below average, who has had an entire year to make improvements, has managed a measly 20% improvement.

Oh, just realised my error - it't not an entire year as he is only part time (still really can't believe that).

Posted by: Iommi Aug 25 2010, 07:48 AM

While DrPepper might eventually be proved right, most rational people, or persons without an axe to grind, knows that a year isn't enough to affect change.

Posted by: DrPepper Aug 25 2010, 08:29 AM

No axe to grind, just trying to give it a bit of perspective as to many people seem keen to give high praise before it's due. As you say give it another couple of years and we will know.

And to a previous comment, yes my glass is generally half empty - and will be until someone tops up the other half

Posted by: blackdog Aug 25 2010, 09:38 AM

Perhaps you could give Mr D some credit for raising a struggling school, Kennet, from also-ran to the best performing school in the district - which didn't happen in one year. Give him time - if he matches his performance at Kennet people will be fighting to get their kids into Trinity in 5 years time.

Posted by: spartacus Aug 25 2010, 01:46 PM

I said you were a glass half EMPTY doom merchant, not a half full happy chappy,,,,

Posted by: DrPepper Aug 25 2010, 01:56 PM

I meant half empty - corrected that now!

Though I am generally happy, with a half empty glass my expectations are low and therefore I'm rarely disappointed!

Posted by: spartacus Aug 25 2010, 03:42 PM

"Well I wish you'd just tell me rather than try to engage my enthusiasm."

Posted by: Newbury Expat Aug 25 2010, 04:37 PM

Wait, what? 20% is a large increase year on year surely?

If you were offered a 20% payrise, would you not think that generous?
If a company had a 20% increase in profits, the board would be lauded to the heavens.
If beer prices went up 20%, people would be up in arms.
If Liverpool had 20% more points last season, well they'd still have been rubbish (albeit with a Champions League place)


Sounds like you have an axe to grind here. True, the results by comparison aren't great but progress doesn't happen overnight (Paul D has been there, what, a year?).

Rome wasn't built in a day and pupils taking history at Trinity know that now.

Posted by: DrPepper Aug 25 2010, 04:46 PM

Yea but 20% increase on 45% is 9% overall, not so great.

If I earned £4k a year I wouldn't be that pleased with a 20% pay rise.
If a companies profits were £1k above break even 20% wouldn't be cause for celebration.
If beer was 20p a pint then 4p extra wouldn't be an issue.
If Liverpool had 20% more points it would be a miracle

I agree, it's a small improvement and time will tell, but lets not claim Mr D as the savour just yet on these below average results.

Whilst on about football - a new manager is generally expected to turn the club around in just one season.

Posted by: Newbury Expat Aug 25 2010, 04:57 PM

Best skip the footy or we'll get the evil eye

Sure a 20% rise on something small is still small. But would you expect to make 8k a year after making 4k in the same circumstances? Surely 4.8k is much better than 4k.

I would love to know where this 20p beer is!! I remember Mars bars going up from 20p to 22p and honestly that seemed like a big jump at 10%.

But I'm not saying Mr D is a saviour (just to be clear) but I do think in 1 year it's about as well as you can do (and also lets give teachers their due as they're the ones giving lessons).

It will be interesting to monitor the progress and see if longer term the changes continue. I can't see 20% being a regular thing but 10% a year for the next 3 years (on top of 20% this year) would see results be more than half as good again as they were last year and that will be exceptional.

Posted by: DrPepper Aug 25 2010, 05:05 PM

Just trying to make the point that it is 20% but off what. As you say lets see where they are in 2013 - think we probably more or less agree there

Good point about the teachers - why is Mr D getting all the credit when he is only part time - it's surely the teacher and pupils that are putting in the most effort.

Posted by: On the edge Aug 25 2010, 08:07 PM

Ha Ha - but the argument is about instant results.

I mentioned the investment not the building. Anyway whats taking them so long to get it built, they've been at it longer than Mr D has been at Trinity!!!

As for being a 'Super Head' - he seems to be doing very well indeed at his home school. No wonder the LEA want to 'spread his expertise'. The argument is more about the method of doing that and the rate for the job. Not really his fault - more the LEA.

I must admit I felt sorry for the kids at Trinity - its reputation since inception hasn't been brilliant and its taken an age for the LEA to notice and do something. We've let them down rather. At long last something is happening and actually showing signs of working.

Lets not play politics with the kids - but get the LEA who have presided over this for far too long sorted.

Posted by: Missus Aug 26 2010, 11:35 AM

Perhaps we should wait until the pupils at Trinity have had the benefit of Mr D as headteacher for their whole GCSE "career", as those at Kennet have had.
And may I ask if those not satisfied with the results have children who attend Trinity? If they did, as I do, then they would be aware of how much work both the pupils and teachers put in.

Posted by: DFoth Aug 26 2010, 06:49 PM

Thank goodness to finally read some sensible and positive comments about the work that is being done at Trinity by the teaching staff and those in charge. It has taken two days to get registered and validated on this forum and I have been desperate to 'put in my tuppeneth' as my grandma used to say.

For those who don't know, the Head at Trinity is actually Mrs C Wilson. Mr D, the Executive Head has been gifted to Trinity to drive the school towards better things, supported very ably by Mrs Wilson and a dedicated teaching staff. As someone who has worked for Mr D in the past, I KNOW that he really is a brilliant leader: he is a hard task master, demanding only the best from all that work with him.

Turning around a school which has a long history of being the weakest amongst strong competition is no easy feat, but I am confident that with the continued hard work and dedication of the staff and the energy of the pupils, things will improve. A few posts ago someone suggested that in 5 years time local parents will be fighting to get their children into the school: I wouldn't be at all surprised if this turns out to be the case. There is real determination to offer all of the students (including all the ones Trinity takes that none of the others want) a demanding, stimulating and ultimately rewarding educational experience.

At least one of you will be asking, "But how are these things possible when the Super Head is part-time?" (His hours seem to be a real issue within this discussion!) Let me tell you how... Because a school is not just about one man, even if he does have an incredibly successful track record. Trinity School will continue to improve because it has parents who care (not all of them, but then show me a school where 100% of the parents are really bothered about their kids' education;) staff who are dynamic, clever, resourceful and resilient (enough to cope with the jibes and demands of those who don't understand what goes on within its walls) and finally a really good ethos. Trinity School is about opportunities for all, including the most socially disadvantaged. It is about driving forward progress, but at the same time caring about the individual child.

How do I know these things? Because from September 2nd I will be working alongside Mr D, Mrs Wilson and all of the other staff - teachers and non-teaching staff alike - and I am really excited about the prospect. In July I spent a couple of weeks in school and was really impressed by the atmosphere around the site and the enthusiasm of so many students for the wonderful things that happen in the school. I have ten years' teaching experience and have worked at two amazingly successful schools: I am very much looking forward to being part of the team that helps Trinity move up those National tables.

So, what I say is this. If you really want to see Trinity improve, then help us. Support events, come and see our fantastic Dance department in action, help us at fundraisers, tell everyone you know that you are looking forward to seeing the school's rise. Channel the energy in positive directions. Yes, ask questions about the rate of improvement and how things are done (why not contact Mrs Wilson and find out exactly what the plans are: you might be pleasantly surprised) but please don't **** what is being done at the school and please stop expecting huge changes to happen straight away. By the time students get to take their GCSEs they have been in full-time education for years (assuming they aren't school refusers or regular truants of course;) their ability to perform in exams is not only dependent on how well the secondary school has served them, but is also a reflection of their primary education and very importantly, their home and social environment. If children come from a home environment that is non-aspirational, then it is very difficult for them to develop into active learners - and yes - I am sure that most of us could transform students into performing seals but what benefit would this offer them in the future?

All that remains for me to say, at the moment is - Trinity students: have faith! Your staff are there for you. If you work hard and do what you are meant to do, you will achieve your potential and you will be able to say that you were part of the generation who turned Trinity around!

Best wishes to all and good luck to all students everywhere for the start of the new academic year!

Posted by: On the edge Aug 26 2010, 07:36 PM

Well - that's pretty positive! Some of us can see the improvement; just keep rolling and wish you well for the future.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Aug 26 2010, 09:40 PM

The 20% figure is referring to another 20% of students getting 5 pass grades, not a 20% improvement on the number that got five pass grades last year. A 20% jump on last year's 32% of students getting those five passes could reasonably be described as a 63% improvement.


Not really, it's a threashold. A nett 20% of all students moved upward through the threshold, so that's a pretty good indication that on average every pupil did better, and the 8% improvement in the average point score per student tells you that's the case.

I think in all fairness these results represent a significant improvement in the school, and as that means a significant improvement in the chances of its students that that should be applauded.

But there are questions that need answering, like what's the secret of his success? And for all that success, no public servant deserves that kind of money.

Posted by: wabbit Aug 27 2010, 05:42 AM

Thank you DFoth for taking the time to post your positive (and more informed) comments - and it is heartening to hear that Trinity isn't quite the 'failure' we could have assumed from the statistics.

I was initially very concerned that some of the reported Trinity results were more reflective of a 'sink' school than that of a relatively affluent part of leafy West Berkshire.

I agree we must all support the efforts being made to turn this school around and of course, Rome wasn't built in a day.

I'm sure we wish you all well!

Posted by: DrPepper Aug 27 2010, 07:30 AM

[quote name='Simon Kirby' date='Aug 26 2010, 10:40 PM' post='22995']
The 20% figure is referring to another 20% of students getting 5 pass grades, not a 20% improvement on the number that got five pass grades last year. A 20% jump on last year's 32% of students getting those five passes could reasonably be described as a 63% improvement.

Agree, just one thing though - 20% more didn't pass, it was a 20% improvement on last years figures which equate to about 9% more pupils passing (20% was the increase).

Also agree with Dfoth, I did pose the question why is part time Mr D getting all the credit when surely the staff and pupils have more to do with the this modest improvement (I'm being more generous now with "modest" rather than "small" )

I'll say it again - for the last time I'm off now! It was an improvement but not the massive improvement some would like to think, and remember that more half failed on Maths & English - the core subjects. I have been playing devil advocate just to keep a perspective on the issue, and l wish them well and time will tell. You can't claim the school has succeeded or failed yet, so don't claim a success on just 9% more pupils improving.

Posted by: Michael F Sep 2 2010, 10:24 PM

DFoth, I really like what you've said and if I knew who you were I'd love to shake your hand. I wish you could come in and say that to the staff and students. You'd do great for motivation.

I've been at Trinity for almost 7 years and, of course I've seen a lot of changes. Right back since Mrs Forster (who I've noticed has not been mentioned in this topic at all) first started. Without all the words that went round from The Newbury Weekly News and then the readers, I do think from first hand experience, she was a great head teacher and I won't have anyone stop me thinking that. Of course, in that time things obviously went wrong to do with learning and results and being one of the main parts of a school need to be sorted pretty sharpish and that is one thing Mr **** seems to be sorting by adjusting accounts so students can have better resources and making sure jobs get done immediately from staff etc but there has been a huge difference in the ethos of the school.

"Personal excellence and collective responsibility" was the motto that was used for about five years and it was clear that this was the case however much it was mocked when the schools results were published. Teachers and Students really enjoyed the fact they could come to school and achieve their potential and I could never find a fault in the general atmosphere.

Now, the results are improving but just as Mrs F predicted. I admit there has been a huge improvement in equipment and long awaited refurbishment of the Hall and various other buildings but pressure has increased so much it shown that several teachers seem to be reaching breaking point. Last year, 13 teachers left Trinity School and it makes you wonder what it takes to get results up?

The motto of Trinity is now no longer in place, even if it is, it certainly shouldn't be. This is just my opinion of inside the school but having been closely involved with the teaching staff, taking part in nearly every open evening and event, it certainly shows.

But I just hope the reputation of Trinity improves and the ethos of the Trinity I remember comes back one day.

To the students and staff of Trinity, I wish you good luck in the future and just remember all it takes is your best.

Posted by: JeffG Sep 3 2010, 08:56 AM

For the record, just what was, or is, the motto of Trinity?

Posted by: Michael F Sep 3 2010, 03:10 PM

It was "Personal excellence and collective responsibility" now we don't seem to have one...

Posted by: GMR Sep 3 2010, 04:22 PM

My daughter went to Trinity school when Mrs Roscoe was there. She went on to Cardiff Uni and did very well.

Posted by: DrPepper Sep 3 2010, 05:01 PM

Michael F - I would hope that with six weeks holiday passed you will be ready for the challenge and the "pressure" is now relieved

Posted by: Rachel Sep 10 2010, 09:32 PM

Some super, positive comments on here, great news! I speak from experience of a tiny primary school in our vicinity; 5 years ago it was pulled out of special measures by a fantastic Head who inspired her staff, pupils, famillies & the local community. It was West Berks best kept secret & no-one wanted to shout too much about it because small was perfect; they didn't have to publish SATs results, it was like a family where children of all abilities thrived & for a time, it was the happiest place anyone could imagine & for my money, the Head that lead that revollution couldn't have been paid enough-what price a child's education? I'd have gladly given my right arm for her to stay. However, she needed to move on (lucky other school!) & a new Head was appointed. In 2 years & 1 term since his appointment to this tiny, 4 class school, 23 members of staff have left. 23. Ofsted reported a reduction to "satisfactory" from "good with elements of outstanding". Pupil numbers have dropped, the community have all but abandonned the school functions & very few parents even speak in the playground, let alone attempt to support their children's learning. That's not because they don't care, just that they feel let down & exhausted by the work of 1 person. So how much is a head worth? In my opinion, all the money they can get if they can motivate their school community, or not as much as urinating on 1 if they're on fire if they can't.

Posted by: Iommi Sep 10 2010, 09:36 PM

Rachel, are you saying that in your opinion, a certain 'super-head' is collecting 'glory' for something that was already in place, and is also now presiding over said school who's performance might now be dipping?

Posted by: Rachel Sep 10 2010, 09:55 PM

Not really, I don't know enough about Trinity or Mr D as my "world" is primary education. However, I suspect that every school has the possibility of being great; the majority of parents want to do the best by their children, regardless of social background, & if this is harnessed & everyone -staff, pupils, parents, community- is working towards the same outcome, the pupils will achieve their best (THEIR best, of course, being the optimum goal). My experience is that a Head who realises this & leads everyone towards a common goal will succeed, & that job should command a high wage. By the same token, a Head that fails in this mission, should be sacked PDQ;no excuses accepted, as clearly, it can be done. The school I speak of proves this, as does Trinity & John O Gaunt from what I've read.

Posted by: DrPepper Sep 10 2010, 10:01 PM

Exactly - don't blame the parents, it's not their job to teach and produce the results - that is the job of employed staff, and their CHOSEN career. I get fed up to the back teeth with teachers blaming their short comings on the parents. Teachers have taken on a "job" - they now need to do the "job" that they chose to do. NO amount of money will produce a good head - a committed individual will produce results. WHY have pupil pupil numbers dropped - it wasn't because a fantastic job was being done by the staff, exactly the opposite!

Posted by: Rachel Sep 10 2010, 10:24 PM

I don't think I made myself clear, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to "blame" anyone, & I don't agree that teaching is not a parental responsibility; we are our children's most influential teachers from birth, & I personally want to hold on to that role, not offload it onto someone just because they chose it as a proffession. However, I think that many of us wouldn't feel comfortable in teaching children some aspects of the curricullum, & thus want to rely on teaching staff to do this. This is the reason I think that a Head's role is foremost to gallvanize the school community & lead everyone along the same path.
You ask why pupil numbers have dropped; many of the staff have been great & have done a brilliant job, but they haven't stayed (I think you can guess why). When your child has such inconsistency of staff, no matter how dynamic each individual might be, the result is going to be endless rounds of assessing, target making, new initiatives then moving on, & you don't fatten a pig by weighing it.
In my opinon, a good head should be rewarded, because he or she can make or break a school & with that is the responsibility of the education & future of a generation.

Posted by: DrPepper Sep 10 2010, 10:32 PM

Disagree, sorry, but this was never an issue 30 years ago - you either had a good school or a bad school - teachers make the school, from what I have seen a new "head" likes to change the decor and claim that'll improve results, and looking at Trinity and John o'Gaunt this is all they have done and just changed position at the bottom of West Berks league table. Fantastic "super heads" who are both still bottom of the league!!!!!

Posted by: Iommi Sep 10 2010, 10:33 PM

Sorry Rachel, I'm struggling to understand what your message is. Is your problem about the demands made by the authorities?

Posted by: DrPepper Sep 10 2010, 10:38 PM

I'm making a wild presumption that Rachel is a teacher who is having difficulty in working in the teaching profession - I could well be wrong though.

Posted by: Rachel Sep 10 2010, 10:44 PM

I just think that if a head can lead the whole school community effectively, they should be rewarded for their talents. I think a talented head will be able to do a great job wherever they go, because they will build a team & forge ahead, & this can be done because most parents want to help their children & staff will want to work under a strong head; ie Strong Head leads focused staff leads focused children assisted by focused parents & community.

Posted by: DrPepper Sep 10 2010, 10:46 PM

Unless they are trying to run two schools as a part-time head i.e Mr D I C K

Posted by: Rachel Sep 10 2010, 10:57 PM

I do work in education, Dr Pepper, but I am not a teacher. I have no difficulty in work; I am extremely happy, as I work in a great school with a great team, but thankyou for your concern!
Ref "what new Heads do" that may be your perception, & I'm sure you may be right, some of the time, but I've seen what a genuine difference a Head can make, both good & bad, & that's why I think they're worth paying if they improve a school.
Ref 30 years ago; Education was a world apart then; firstly everyone went to their local school & it was at the heart of the community with a broad cross section of society in each school. The removal of grammar schools & introduction of choice has served to re-inforce elitism as oppose to reducing it.

Posted by: Iommi Sep 10 2010, 11:03 PM

I feel that there has been way too much emphasis on academics - getting grades and that some how is the be and end all. This is pointless for those that simply are not A grade; having average grades are pointless. There seems little for the academically average to aspire to.

I believe in catchments as well. Go to your local school. Then perhaps everyone else can get to work on time; if we cannot improve school standards. We might have fewer fat kids as well.

Posted by: Rachel Sep 10 2010, 11:14 PM

See post #41 -A child's own best is the optimum goal. This should be not only academic; the world will always need tractor drivers, refuse collectors etc; non academics & academics alike. Children need to find their ability, then work hard to improve & branch out, that's a true education...& walking to school with your mates is all part of that, probably when you first debated to be honest! But "choice" is here to stay & we can't change that, so will have to work with it

Posted by: DrPepper Sep 11 2010, 12:11 AM

Yep, brainwashed teacher talking- go out get and get real job then comment!!!! "walking to school with your mates" Now back in 2010...........

Posted by: Iommi Sep 11 2010, 12:14 AM

??????????

Posted by: DrPepper Sep 11 2010, 08:02 AM

Walking to school - who does that these days - if you have to travel more than 100 yards it's out with the 4x4

Posted by: Iommi Sep 11 2010, 08:04 AM

Ah right, exactly. On my planet there would be catchments for private schools and there would be a no drive zone within a mile, except for those that live in that zone.

Posted by: On the edge Sep 11 2010, 08:27 AM

I think Rachel is talking about ledership. A 'Head Teacher' is a catch all for two very distinct but important roles. Leader and Manager. In fact very little if any 'teaching' In any field of endevour inspiratiopnal leadership makes the difference between success and failure. That's what needs to be recognised. Mr D seems to be an inspirational leader - that's a role that can be shared. However, the 'management' bit which are distinct sets of processes can't be - however, they can be properly left to a deputy.

I suggest its our thinking that needs adjusting - particularly round the definition of the role 'Head Teacher'. In the commercial world this is similar to the oft discussed difference between an organisation's Chairman and Chief Executive.

So I'd agree with what Rachel is saying - we should be willing to pay to keep inspirational leaders, or at least understand the importance of this when recruiting.

Having said all that, being somewhat cynical of politicians - where it is understood that leadership is a key element - it can be used as a political tool. Never for one moment imagine we'd ever get to equality of esteem - most politicians have a vested interest to ensure we don't. So, if by chance we end up with a good school in the 'wrong place' what better way to eliminate it than by choosing a poor leader. Rachel mentions the school in question as very very small - does the LEA really want small schools?

Posted by: Iommi Sep 11 2010, 08:54 AM

I'm still struggling to understand what Rachel is getting at.

It seems that a former head of a small failing school developed the school into happy and vibrant place to learn and teach, but recently that has changed and teachers and parents have deserted it. It is not clear to me if she is pointing to the subsequent 'head' placement (whatever happened to head-master and mistress?), or the authorities; parents or the teachers seem to be let-off.

It seems to me. she is speaking in a way so that we may draw our own conclusions, so as not to compromise her or other's positions. In other words Rachel, and I'm sure there might be one or two howls of 'hypocrite', but would you spit it out?

Posted by: JeffG Sep 11 2010, 09:53 AM

I don't think anyone was blaming parents for anything. But I hope I am misunderstanding your comment here that parents don't have any responsibility for their childrens' education?

Parents are a major part of a child's education, providing books, encouragement etc., and those that think it's just the teacher's job are giving their kids a very poor start in life.

Posted by: DrPepper Sep 11 2010, 10:47 AM

Yes, what I was getting at is that parents do have a large role to play in their kids education - it just that far to often teachers seem to want blame the parents for their (the teachers) failings in the class room. After all once the children have been left at the school gates there is very little the parent can do, then it's up to the teachers to teach and hopefully engage and inspire the pupils.

Posted by: Rachel Sep 11 2010, 12:45 PM

You couldn't be more wrong DP, but I won't be drawn into explaining how I've come to know about the schools I speak of, only to say that my main job title & the one I value above all others is "Mother". I do also work in a paid job, it is for 52 weeks a year & 5 days a week with 5 weeks paid holiday plus bank holidays. I have worked in both public & private sectors, lived in several places, travelled a little & been inside many institutions including prisons (though I have never been an inmate) & I believe that the lessons I have learned in life entitle me to comment. Indeed, I think that this forum deserves the input from people of all walks, & I think it's a sad indictement when people are made to feel belittled & bullied by other poster's comments. Or maybe I'm wrong there, too, DP, but I'm sure you'll tell me to go & get a real job before commenting again because I now understand that you are always right & everyone else should be quiet
Back to the real debate now please.

Posted by: Iommi Sep 11 2010, 12:56 PM

Mine next? http://www.thesmilies.com http://forum.newburytoday.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=868&view=findpost&p=23858

Don't worry about DP, I have a feeling that was beer talking!

Posted by: user23 Sep 11 2010, 01:17 PM

You're seriously saying it's not a parent's duty to teach their children?

Posted by: Rachel Sep 11 2010, 01:23 PM

2004 Small School placed on special measures, Head A attempts rescue. Head B joins to assist, Head A leaves.
2005 Small School re-inspected & reported as improving & satisfactory under Head B, with some new, some old staff & pupils.
2007 Small School re-inspected & reported as good with elements of outstanding. Head B remains in post with same staff, growing number of pupils.
2008 Head B announces her resignation, moving away with family. Head C takes over a thriving, happy, good, consistently performing well Small School.
2010 Head C still in post. 21 staff have left during 2 years, many pupils leave, Ofsted reports school to be only satisfactory & cites many problems within the school, mostly down to management, staff turn over & leadership. However, special measures are not imposed, despite it's clear demise since the previous Ofsted. During the summer holidays, 5 children leave & 2 teachers decide not to return in September, leaving KS2 with both teachers unknown to the pupils & parents.

I hope this provides some clarity?! The only reason I seem to talk in riddles, Iommi, is that I am mindful of who might read this thread. I can only state facts, as my son is still in the education system & I try, for his sake, to find the positives as always concentrating on the negatives would turn me into a miserable, moaning person. The trouble is, I'm having trouble finding good there at the moment, mostly because all the staff & many of the children have left so no-one can show me the good! That's also why I place value on a good Head; I've seen what a good job 1 can do & what a terrible mess another can make, even though they're likely to have been paid the same. Head B is still doing a great job in other schools, she spent a year in a school after she left Small School, then took a temporary post in a neighbouring LEA, but West Berks are very fortunate to have her back now & I'll be watching that new school's rise as she will pull it up, without doubt, despite it being "troubled" & I hope she gets paid handsomely.

Posted by: Biker1 Sep 11 2010, 01:40 PM

Some obviously think this way these days.
Probably why there are so many wayward youths in modern society.
It is every parent's job to protect, nurture and educate their offspring - if they cannot or will not do that then they are unfit for the job.

Posted by: Iommi Sep 11 2010, 01:41 PM

I understand your position with discretion (you could have PM'd me if you felt it worthwhile), I was only confused because you repudiated a previous post of mine that now seems to be partly true. I understand now though.

One thing I have heard about the teaching profession, which is mirrored in the health service; is there is a massive reluctance to deal with incompetence...at all levels.

Posted by: Rachel Sep 11 2010, 02:09 PM

I'm sad to say I think you are right. I have spoken with the Head & his 2 previous Assistant Heads (not to the current, temporary 1 though) on many occassions, spoken to & written to the Governors, spoken to Education Welfare & emailled Ian Pearson (Head of Education at West Berks), & each time I am refered back to the Head. It seems that I have a choice; like it or move. But having worked in education all my life, always having worked (apart from 5 months maternity leave), my husband always having worked & paid his taxes too, I feel it is our right to have our son educated well by the State. This school has proven how good it can be, but now that it is failling, no-one wants to stand up & deal with the incompetence, & our children are left as pawns in this bizare game of "Head in the Sand" rather than sack the villain. Nor will he move on of his own vollition-where else would he go?! So we are stuck in a no win situation where we've tasted brilliance but are destined never to regain it. If Mr D were to come to Small School & he turned it back around I wouldn't begrudge him a single penny of my taxes.

Posted by: On the edge Sep 11 2010, 02:49 PM

Spot on! Regrettably and I suppose it's the nature of these things, this local forum is somewhat parochical. I think it is beyond dispute that education is a joint venture - between parent and teacher. Teaching is a vocation and not just a job. As the Labour Party have discovered over the past decade. If it were, then the enormous sums spent; ironically mostly at the lower end of the spectrum would now be bearing fruit. It isn't - for the reasons you've enunciated..

Posted by: DrPepper Sep 11 2010, 03:46 PM

Not in the classroom it's not - that was what I was saying.

Posted by: DrPepper Sep 11 2010, 03:48 PM

Wine actually

Posted by: DrPepper Sep 11 2010, 03:51 PM

Rachel - I did say I could be wrong (it's not unheard of!), but you could have clarified your position from the first post.

Five weeks holiday eh

Posted by: Rachel Sep 11 2010, 09:41 PM

In post #46 you said this, but it was post #52 I was responding to.

Yes, twas 4 weeks but after 5 years I got an extra week .