From the Sleaford Standard
DEREK Daniels, chairman of governors at Lafford High School, has vowed that the fight to save the school goes on.
He said: "Mr Watson listened to what was said at the meeting and he has given the parents what they want. He has answered their wishes so parents have got a chance to keep the school open and the fight continues." He added: "I would like to thank Paul, St George's and the governors who have helped us over the last two years."
He said Mrs Irvine received a standing ovation from other staff members when the announcement was made she had been appointed acting head and he said all the staff and governors are behind her.
---
Peter Duxbury, Lincolnshire's Director of Children's Services, said parents at the meeting expressed dissatisfaction with the leadership in spite of the fact Mr Watson had led the school thorough a period of significant improvement, with examination results improving over the past two years.
He said: "The consultation process regarding closure of the school will continue. In the meantime the support given to The Lafford School by the local authority and St George's will continue, though without the executive leadership of Mr Watson. "The local authority would like to thank Mr Watson and governors at St George's for their continued support of schools in the area."
Friday, 21 March 2008
Lafford's numbers have to add up
From the Sleaford Standard
EDITOR – I attended the meeting on March 6 at the Lafford High School, Billinghay to discuss the proposal by the governors to close the school. Understandably, passions were running very high. I attended the Lafford High School many years ago and I have very fond memories of my time spent there under the headship of Mr Padgett.
In the last few years since the Lafford High School has been working in partnership with St George's, it has made improvements year on year under the headship of Paul Watson. This is due to the good leadership of Paul and the dedication of the teachers and staff who have all worked extremely hard.
My understanding of the problem is that there are not sufficient pupils coming into the school from this summer (19 in total) and the pupils in the local primary schools for the coming years are very low in number.
This will mean that the overall numbers within the school will continue to fall year on year which will make the school unviable in terms of educational provision and finance. The local management of schools funding is mostly decided by pupil numbers and, although the county council has very limited discretion, it is obliged to follow the Government's funding formula.
Closing the school is something the council has desperately tried to avoid. This is why the partnership was encouraged with St George's and additional support provided to the school for many years by the county council. Without better parental support in terms of numbers it is difficult to see a better way forward in the interests of the children.
If local people want to keep the school open we need more children to attend – so if you have a child or grandchild who is 11 years or over please consider sending them to the Lafford High School.
As the local councillor I would be happy to discuss the issue in more detail. I can be contacted at cllrp.bradwell@lincolnshire.gov.uk or by telephone on 01526 352842.
COUNCILLOR PATRICIA BRADWELL
County Councillor for Billinghay & Metheringham
____
What is your response to this, please? All comments welcome. Please contact Patricia Bradwell as well if you feel the need to.
EDITOR – I attended the meeting on March 6 at the Lafford High School, Billinghay to discuss the proposal by the governors to close the school. Understandably, passions were running very high. I attended the Lafford High School many years ago and I have very fond memories of my time spent there under the headship of Mr Padgett.
In the last few years since the Lafford High School has been working in partnership with St George's, it has made improvements year on year under the headship of Paul Watson. This is due to the good leadership of Paul and the dedication of the teachers and staff who have all worked extremely hard.
My understanding of the problem is that there are not sufficient pupils coming into the school from this summer (19 in total) and the pupils in the local primary schools for the coming years are very low in number.
This will mean that the overall numbers within the school will continue to fall year on year which will make the school unviable in terms of educational provision and finance. The local management of schools funding is mostly decided by pupil numbers and, although the county council has very limited discretion, it is obliged to follow the Government's funding formula.
Closing the school is something the council has desperately tried to avoid. This is why the partnership was encouraged with St George's and additional support provided to the school for many years by the county council. Without better parental support in terms of numbers it is difficult to see a better way forward in the interests of the children.
If local people want to keep the school open we need more children to attend – so if you have a child or grandchild who is 11 years or over please consider sending them to the Lafford High School.
As the local councillor I would be happy to discuss the issue in more detail. I can be contacted at cllrp.bradwell@lincolnshire.gov.uk or by telephone on 01526 352842.
COUNCILLOR PATRICIA BRADWELL
County Councillor for Billinghay & Metheringham
____
What is your response to this, please? All comments welcome. Please contact Patricia Bradwell as well if you feel the need to.
School closure will drive families away
I found much encouragement and hope in this letter, for it talks of community. It talks about the difficult path of standing up for justice. My community, your community, our community. Thanks so much, Don.
Again from the Sleaford Standard (who, by the way, have been very supportive. Thank you.)
EDITOR – I'm trying to relate the comments of Secretary of State Ed Balls to what is happening at the Lafford High School in Billinghay.
Where do such statements made by him as "no child in the 21st century should go to school in fear or be prevented from learning" or "every young person in our country has the chance to fulfil their potential" apply in the scheme of local school closures? Has Mr Balls ever visited the Lafford High School before he gave the OK to instigate its closure? He should come to rural Lincolnshire and experience for himself exactly how these children are going to 'fulfil their potential'.
This school thrives on its children's successes. The children thrive on the school's commitment in helping them achieve their full potential. Isn't that what Mr Balls is saying they should have? This school copes with children other schools have turned away. This school is an achieving school, it is breaking down barriers so all can have equal chances.
The campaign to save the Lafford High School has seen a united community; it has brought out parents and grandparents, aunts and uncles, old Laffordians and potential new Laffordians. Closing this school will see an established community crumble. There'll be no spirit, no communication. It'll leave families dejected as they see younger families move away.
Perhaps it is time the Government needs to appoint a Secretary of State for Deprived Children, Empty Schools and Broken Families.
DJ IRVINE
Billinghay
Again from the Sleaford Standard (who, by the way, have been very supportive. Thank you.)
EDITOR – I'm trying to relate the comments of Secretary of State Ed Balls to what is happening at the Lafford High School in Billinghay.
Where do such statements made by him as "no child in the 21st century should go to school in fear or be prevented from learning" or "every young person in our country has the chance to fulfil their potential" apply in the scheme of local school closures? Has Mr Balls ever visited the Lafford High School before he gave the OK to instigate its closure? He should come to rural Lincolnshire and experience for himself exactly how these children are going to 'fulfil their potential'.
This school thrives on its children's successes. The children thrive on the school's commitment in helping them achieve their full potential. Isn't that what Mr Balls is saying they should have? This school copes with children other schools have turned away. This school is an achieving school, it is breaking down barriers so all can have equal chances.
The campaign to save the Lafford High School has seen a united community; it has brought out parents and grandparents, aunts and uncles, old Laffordians and potential new Laffordians. Closing this school will see an established community crumble. There'll be no spirit, no communication. It'll leave families dejected as they see younger families move away.
Perhaps it is time the Government needs to appoint a Secretary of State for Deprived Children, Empty Schools and Broken Families.
DJ IRVINE
Billinghay
Monday, 17 March 2008
Simple arithmetic
From the figures on record:
The school in Tattershall has 52 surplus spaces.
The school in Ruskington has 11 surplus spaces.
The school in Sleaford has 0 spaces (due to an excess of 94)
52+11+0=63
Number of places needed for Lafford children = 268
268-63=205
That leaves 205 children from the Lafford needing to be provided for. If they all left TODAY, they would be without a school place. Perhaps that would shake up the system!
The school in Tattershall has 52 surplus spaces.
The school in Ruskington has 11 surplus spaces.
The school in Sleaford has 0 spaces (due to an excess of 94)
52+11+0=63
Number of places needed for Lafford children = 268
268-63=205
That leaves 205 children from the Lafford needing to be provided for. If they all left TODAY, they would be without a school place. Perhaps that would shake up the system!
Monday's Echo
MP joins fight !?! As reported in today's Lincolnshire Echo. I wonder if Mr Balls will get involved.
If 'caring parents 101020' figures are accurate (see post below), and I have no reason to doubt they are, there aren't enough places for all the children The Lafford currently holds, to go to!
Looks like the biggest school has numbers in excess of the allocated NOR, so what is going to happen to the 268 children from the Lafford? Even with all the places counted up at the Gartree and other local secondaries, there still aren't enough places. What next folks? Perhaps they will build a NEW SCHOOL for us!
If 'caring parents 101020' figures are accurate (see post below), and I have no reason to doubt they are, there aren't enough places for all the children The Lafford currently holds, to go to!
Looks like the biggest school has numbers in excess of the allocated NOR, so what is going to happen to the 268 children from the Lafford? Even with all the places counted up at the Gartree and other local secondaries, there still aren't enough places. What next folks? Perhaps they will build a NEW SCHOOL for us!
Let's take a closer look
NOT FALLING ROLLS BUT AN INCREASE
The Lafford High School has had a 43.5% increase in pupil numbers from 2002 to 2008.
The Lincolnshire School Organisation Plan downloads of years 2002-2007, 2003-2008, 2004-2009 supplement, 2005-2010 update, 2006-2011 update and 2007- 2012 update, state the numbers on roll at the Lafford High School.
The numbers on roll (NOR) for The Lafford High School were:
January 2002 187 pupils
January 2003 190 pupils
January 2004 247 pupils
January 2005 273 pupils
January 2006 288 pupils
September 2007 262 pupils
The letter from Children’s services then states:
January 2008 268 pupils
This is an increase of 81 pupils between 2002 and 2008
NOT A DECREASE.
It is stated the falling rolls are also affecting the neighbouring areas of Tattershall, Ruskington and Sleaford.
According to the School organisation plan the numbers on roll for Tattershall secondary school was 513 in January 2002 and was still 513 as of September 2007.
The numbers on roll for the Ruskington secondary school was 345 in January 2002 and has INCREASED by 20 to 365 as stated for roll numbers in September 2007.
The roll numbers for St. George’s College of Technology in Sleaford in January 2002 was 1350 and has INCREASED by 323 to 1673 pupils in September 2007, which incidentally is an excess of 94 over the capacity of the school.
It is stated that if The Lafford High School closes, parents will be offered the choice of a place, with transport provided where appropriate, at neighbouring schools to be named.
The school in Tattershall has 52 surplus spaces.
The school in Ruskington has 11 surplus spaces.
The school in Sleaford has 0 spaces due to an excess of 94.
These figures are recorded in the Lincolnshire School Organisation Plan update September 2007.
There are 268 pupils recorded at The Lafford High School and only 63 available spaces in neighbouring schools at present.
THE LAFFORD HIGH SCHOOL IS ESSENTIAL AND VITAL.
caring parents, Billinghay 101020
----
Thank you so much 'caring parents 101020' for your hard work in sifting through the figures.
---
Note: If you would like to check them out for yourself, please click here.
School Organisation Plans 2003-2008 from Lincolnshire County Council website.
The Lafford High School has had a 43.5% increase in pupil numbers from 2002 to 2008.
The Lincolnshire School Organisation Plan downloads of years 2002-2007, 2003-2008, 2004-2009 supplement, 2005-2010 update, 2006-2011 update and 2007- 2012 update, state the numbers on roll at the Lafford High School.
The numbers on roll (NOR) for The Lafford High School were:
January 2002 187 pupils
January 2003 190 pupils
January 2004 247 pupils
January 2005 273 pupils
January 2006 288 pupils
September 2007 262 pupils
The letter from Children’s services then states:
January 2008 268 pupils
This is an increase of 81 pupils between 2002 and 2008
NOT A DECREASE.
It is stated the falling rolls are also affecting the neighbouring areas of Tattershall, Ruskington and Sleaford.
According to the School organisation plan the numbers on roll for Tattershall secondary school was 513 in January 2002 and was still 513 as of September 2007.
The numbers on roll for the Ruskington secondary school was 345 in January 2002 and has INCREASED by 20 to 365 as stated for roll numbers in September 2007.
The roll numbers for St. George’s College of Technology in Sleaford in January 2002 was 1350 and has INCREASED by 323 to 1673 pupils in September 2007, which incidentally is an excess of 94 over the capacity of the school.
It is stated that if The Lafford High School closes, parents will be offered the choice of a place, with transport provided where appropriate, at neighbouring schools to be named.
The school in Tattershall has 52 surplus spaces.
The school in Ruskington has 11 surplus spaces.
The school in Sleaford has 0 spaces due to an excess of 94.
These figures are recorded in the Lincolnshire School Organisation Plan update September 2007.
There are 268 pupils recorded at The Lafford High School and only 63 available spaces in neighbouring schools at present.
THE LAFFORD HIGH SCHOOL IS ESSENTIAL AND VITAL.
caring parents, Billinghay 101020
----
Thank you so much 'caring parents 101020' for your hard work in sifting through the figures.
---
Note: If you would like to check them out for yourself, please click here.
School Organisation Plans 2003-2008 from Lincolnshire County Council website.
Sunday, 16 March 2008
An open letter
An open letter regarding the proposed closure of The Lafford High School, Billinghay
As a happy resident of Billinghay since 2002, I am unwilling to just lie down and accept that the local secondary school should just shut up shop and disappear. There are still many unanswered questions, many of which your journalists may have ways of investigating.
In a recent letter (dated 11.3.08) to parents, the Head of Children's Services makes his points and shares his views. Whatever discussions have taken place prior to this letter, much of it has taken place behind closed doors. This appears to be the practice of our leaders today.
In his letter, Mr Duxbury cites falling numbers as a problem that affects our wider community, listing the local Billinghay primary school as well as the towns of Tattershall, Ruskington and Sleaford as facing this same trend. Has he been to these places to tell parents that the same fate will befall them?
Interestingly, he cites government planning terms for secondary schools as requiring an annual intake over 120 children in order to remain sustainable. By that, I take it to mean that if your school has an intake below this, you will be closed. How many Lincolnshire schools will be affected by this? Give us some figures, please.
What is the justification behind his statement? Well, allegedly these numbers are ‘needed to stimulate learning through social interaction which leads to the sharing of ideas, information and experiences’ as part of the answer. Excuse me, this happens in groups much, much smaller that the numbers quoted, at dining tables and classrooms all over the world and in these islands. Evidence, Mr Duxbury. I would like you to share the evidence for your acceptance of these government terms with all of us. Secondary school children, you allege, are unable to learn in year groups smaller than this size, what about primary schools? Any self-respecting professional in education, home educating parent, anyone who works with young people, or anyone who knows a little bit about ‘education’ (in the widest sense) would have a little chuckle at this. Why then is the government so obsessed with keeping class sizes down? Because children learn best when the group size matches their needs, they are happy, well supervised and content. Children were never designed to learn in gangs!
Yes, the introduction of Diplomas will necessitate changes, because all children at KS4 are entitled to them. Our education department will need to ensure that all schools, not just the ones with super heads, academies and casino style schools which bring in big bucks, have a right to an education. The young people, families and residents of Billinghay deserve a look in.
“OFSTED and earlier research reveal small school community worth. Planning research has shown that costed against the tax-paying base major local authority services like education cost least in the smallest communities, most in the largest. The school is often the only return for village tax-payers on moneys otherwise spent largely in the towns. One LEA argued a few years ago that high unit costs were so fragmentary an element of the overall budget that savings from closing all its small schools would bring a one-off £50 payment to the rest ........jam spread thin indeed! Escalating dependence on transport is financially unwise, unpredictable and at odds with environmental policy.” Mervyn Benford of NASS
This potential school closure in Billinghay necessitates an escalating dependence on transport. We already spend a LOT of money on school transport (perhaps the people of Lincolnshire need to see figures for this published in the media), with young people living the life of commuters from the age of 12 (some start even earlier) all in the name of choice. Is there any evidence to prove that this is money well spent (apart from anecdotal evidence)? We have all just received our phenomenal Lincolnshire County Council Tax bills. What percentage of that is paying for school transport? Please enlighten us. How can we continue to justify big bills when alternative means have not been explored? This does not even touch upon the moral and ethical issues of our environmental footprint for the commuting child. Is there an argument for one teacher to commute to the children, or hundreds of children to commute to their teacher? No easy answers, but LCC has to provide some evidence for their decisions.
The ‘consultation letter’ talks about meetings with parents/carers and staff. No mention of the wider community. What about the future parents living in the village? What about those who may want to work locally, to have a part time job that they can walk to? Do they not have a voice? Have they been officially informed about all of this? Perhaps there are those who are sitting back in the belief that their child is far too intelligent to want a place at the school. Well, there are no guarantees, regarding intelligence or provision. All it would take would be for a different government to be voted in! So, while there is a process governed by law, there are also processes governed by conscience. Is that not what we as parents and educators strive to train up our children to achieve? The staff at the Lafford provide a good example of this.
As a parent myself, I was most shocked by the reactions at the open meeting held at the school. Broken promises, some parents feeling let down, tearful children pleading for their school, teachers (ever the professionals) silently observing. What messages were being communicated that night? Those ultimately responsible for the education of the children in our village (yes, our village) were passing on some very strong messages that night. Not about what they had done, more about what they hadn’t done.
As law-abiding citizens of this country, we still have free will and freedom of speech. As parents we have rights and responsibilities. Section 7 of the Education Act 1996 clearly spells out our parental responsibilities. “The parent of every child of compulsory school age shall cause him to receive efficient full-time education suitable to his age, ability and aptitude, and to any special educational needs he may have, either by regular attendance at school or otherwise.” As a result of the proposed closure, many parents are not making informed choices, but are being forced to choose because of fear of their child missing out on an education.
We can only make informed choices if those in authority make wise decisions. So, to those responsible for making these decisions, I appeal to your better natures to enable the parents of children in Billinghay and beyond, to exercise these rights and responsibilities. Listen, look around you, be filled with compassion, switch on your conscience, then act.
As a happy resident of Billinghay since 2002, I am unwilling to just lie down and accept that the local secondary school should just shut up shop and disappear. There are still many unanswered questions, many of which your journalists may have ways of investigating.
In a recent letter (dated 11.3.08) to parents, the Head of Children's Services makes his points and shares his views. Whatever discussions have taken place prior to this letter, much of it has taken place behind closed doors. This appears to be the practice of our leaders today.
In his letter, Mr Duxbury cites falling numbers as a problem that affects our wider community, listing the local Billinghay primary school as well as the towns of Tattershall, Ruskington and Sleaford as facing this same trend. Has he been to these places to tell parents that the same fate will befall them?
Interestingly, he cites government planning terms for secondary schools as requiring an annual intake over 120 children in order to remain sustainable. By that, I take it to mean that if your school has an intake below this, you will be closed. How many Lincolnshire schools will be affected by this? Give us some figures, please.
What is the justification behind his statement? Well, allegedly these numbers are ‘needed to stimulate learning through social interaction which leads to the sharing of ideas, information and experiences’ as part of the answer. Excuse me, this happens in groups much, much smaller that the numbers quoted, at dining tables and classrooms all over the world and in these islands. Evidence, Mr Duxbury. I would like you to share the evidence for your acceptance of these government terms with all of us. Secondary school children, you allege, are unable to learn in year groups smaller than this size, what about primary schools? Any self-respecting professional in education, home educating parent, anyone who works with young people, or anyone who knows a little bit about ‘education’ (in the widest sense) would have a little chuckle at this. Why then is the government so obsessed with keeping class sizes down? Because children learn best when the group size matches their needs, they are happy, well supervised and content. Children were never designed to learn in gangs!
Yes, the introduction of Diplomas will necessitate changes, because all children at KS4 are entitled to them. Our education department will need to ensure that all schools, not just the ones with super heads, academies and casino style schools which bring in big bucks, have a right to an education. The young people, families and residents of Billinghay deserve a look in.
“OFSTED and earlier research reveal small school community worth. Planning research has shown that costed against the tax-paying base major local authority services like education cost least in the smallest communities, most in the largest. The school is often the only return for village tax-payers on moneys otherwise spent largely in the towns. One LEA argued a few years ago that high unit costs were so fragmentary an element of the overall budget that savings from closing all its small schools would bring a one-off £50 payment to the rest ........jam spread thin indeed! Escalating dependence on transport is financially unwise, unpredictable and at odds with environmental policy.” Mervyn Benford of NASS
This potential school closure in Billinghay necessitates an escalating dependence on transport. We already spend a LOT of money on school transport (perhaps the people of Lincolnshire need to see figures for this published in the media), with young people living the life of commuters from the age of 12 (some start even earlier) all in the name of choice. Is there any evidence to prove that this is money well spent (apart from anecdotal evidence)? We have all just received our phenomenal Lincolnshire County Council Tax bills. What percentage of that is paying for school transport? Please enlighten us. How can we continue to justify big bills when alternative means have not been explored? This does not even touch upon the moral and ethical issues of our environmental footprint for the commuting child. Is there an argument for one teacher to commute to the children, or hundreds of children to commute to their teacher? No easy answers, but LCC has to provide some evidence for their decisions.
The ‘consultation letter’ talks about meetings with parents/carers and staff. No mention of the wider community. What about the future parents living in the village? What about those who may want to work locally, to have a part time job that they can walk to? Do they not have a voice? Have they been officially informed about all of this? Perhaps there are those who are sitting back in the belief that their child is far too intelligent to want a place at the school. Well, there are no guarantees, regarding intelligence or provision. All it would take would be for a different government to be voted in! So, while there is a process governed by law, there are also processes governed by conscience. Is that not what we as parents and educators strive to train up our children to achieve? The staff at the Lafford provide a good example of this.
As a parent myself, I was most shocked by the reactions at the open meeting held at the school. Broken promises, some parents feeling let down, tearful children pleading for their school, teachers (ever the professionals) silently observing. What messages were being communicated that night? Those ultimately responsible for the education of the children in our village (yes, our village) were passing on some very strong messages that night. Not about what they had done, more about what they hadn’t done.
As law-abiding citizens of this country, we still have free will and freedom of speech. As parents we have rights and responsibilities. Section 7 of the Education Act 1996 clearly spells out our parental responsibilities. “The parent of every child of compulsory school age shall cause him to receive efficient full-time education suitable to his age, ability and aptitude, and to any special educational needs he may have, either by regular attendance at school or otherwise.” As a result of the proposed closure, many parents are not making informed choices, but are being forced to choose because of fear of their child missing out on an education.
We can only make informed choices if those in authority make wise decisions. So, to those responsible for making these decisions, I appeal to your better natures to enable the parents of children in Billinghay and beyond, to exercise these rights and responsibilities. Listen, look around you, be filled with compassion, switch on your conscience, then act.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
