SAY NO TO THE SAR!

Coombe Road Meeting Wednesay 21 March 7.30pm

2007-03-12T21:33:00.000Z

The next Coombe Road Action Group meeting will be on Wednesday 21st March at 7.30pm.
The meeting will be to discuss & agree planned objections to the adjudicator. Anyone that would like to input into the group objection should respond to Jane's email of 12 March or contact her via email: mauritius.queen@btopenworld.com
Hope to see you there.

So Much for Equal Opportunities or Choice in Education

2007-02-28T16:20:00.000Z

So, the CF&S Committee decided to vote in favour of a new and socially divisive admissions system. Families in Coombe Road, Bevendean and Moulsecoomb are in a single catchment for Falmer School.

All the talk in the news today is about lotteries for popular schools in the city: Dorothy Stringer, Varndean, Blatchington Mill and Hove Park. Well, we will not even get the opportunity to enter those lotteries. We have lost the lottery already. We are second in the queue for the "good schools".

On the BBC news story Schools to give places by lottery we are told, "Brighton and Hove says the new system will give more children a better chance of getting into popular schools." I nearly spat out my breakfast when I read this. More middle-class children perhaps, but children from Moulsecoomb and Bevendean while have no chance of accessing any of the most popular schools. Not even a glimmer.

So you'll understand that when Pat Hawkes comes out with another platitude, "Brighton and Hove is a city of haves and have-nots and the have-nots have been left out", I gave up trying to eat my breakfast altogether and my partner had to head for the shower as he was covered in orange juice.

So what do we have now under the new admissions system. Do we all get an equal opportunity to access the "best schools" in the city? Or do some children only get a chance to access the least popular ones? Ding, dong! Yes, we have another group of "have nots" who are less likely to complain because they are used to being in this situation.

Some people may want to send their child to Falmer. It might be the best school for them. Others may not. The choice is no longer there for those of us in this single catchment.

The criteria for naming a school a "good school" or a "worse school" are set by the government. The league tables and Ofsted reports that offer parents, as consumers, guides when making their choices are supposed to help us make a choice in favour of good schools. Falmer School has been improving partly because they have taken children from an extended catchment incorporating more parents who are enthusiastic about education, but this new admissions system will ensure that the school is cut-off at the knees as the catchment from which they take shrinks. Pat Hawkes, don't try to sell me the idea that all schools in Brighton & Hove are "good schools". They are not equally good, and it does not take much to ruin a school completely. Falmer's future is uncertain.

This is now a two-tier education system, except the boundaries between those that will receive a good education, and those that will receive an education of a lower standard, are very clearly drawn.

All the children will receive an education which is less comprehensive, whether middle-class or working class. The catchments are drawn roughly along class divides. They will meet fewer peers from different backgrounds to themselves. They should learn from experience how other people live, and learn to be tolerant of other people's values, but also to test their own values against others. Let's actively counter prejudice and ignorance, rather than teach it in citizenship classes.

I would love Pat Hawkes and Brighton & Hove Council to eat their own words - then perhaps I would be able to eat my breakfast. I'm disgusted at the result of this review. It is disgraceful that politics have been allowed to influence such an important decision. The May council elections are far more significant than the future of our children. Politicians with a stake in the outcome should not be allowed to make a decision on schools admissions if this is what happens. The Greens and Labour groups both dismissed members of Children, Families & Schools Committee because they were having doubts about the decision. I'm sure they will gain votes in the marginal seats, which incidentally gain access to the popular schools now. They may be surprised how many votes they lose in previous Labour strongholds.

I can say with confidence that the Council have failed to make a fairer admissions system. So much for choice and opportunity. So much for diversity in a comprehensive system. The combination of elements that Brighton & Hove have employed results in "haves and have nots", a two-tier system of education that will deny many children in poorer areas the fantastic education they deserve.

Notice: Demo at CF&S Decision Meeting Tonight!

2007-02-27T13:39:00.000Z

Parents will be gathering to demonstrate for and against the proposals outside the Children, Families & Schools Committee Meeting this evening at Brighton Town Hall from 4pm. The meeting starts at 5pm. You can see the meeting, but will need to go to the Council reception and get yourself an entry ticket. You should do this as soon as you arrive.

Please note, the meeting as at BRIGHTON TOWN HALL in BARTHOLEMEW SQUARE. (Not at Hove Town Hall as it was last time.)

Bring whistles, banners, and your children if they are up to it. This is your last chance to get your voice heard. If you do not take responsiblity yourselves and speak out, no one else can for you.

Clearly, I would like the vote to go against the proposals, as I feel that they are unfair to my area, Moulsecoomb, Bevendean and Coombe Road, but also to many other areas in the city. They will destroy the lovely community that has developed here. I don't think anyone has really heard how they will affect us. The mantra of "doing what's best for the whole city" seems like a way of closing ears to our concerns, rather than actually recognising that the city is made up of communities and each community's interests must be heard properly in order for the right decision that is "best for the city as a whole" to be made.

I find it unbelievable that people accuse Juliet McCaffery of thinking just of her area. She listened to families from this area and responded to them, she spoke to people from Patcham and Portslade. She debated with us; she questioned our stance. We had to persuade her and it took time. Moreover, there is no shame in being persuaded. She certainly did not sell out or act selfishly for her own Ward. She actually listened to the parts of the city that she had not heard from. And then, after all that, she made the difficult decision of breaking with the Labour group. I don't think anyone would choose to do that unless they were driven by a strong moral imperative. It is not an easy thing to do. Since the CF&S meeting on 2nd February she has been denied the opportunity by the Council to speak publicly and defend her decision. Judgement has been passed without proper trial.

I still do not think that the concerns of many of the parents living in the Longhill catchment, or the catchment for Portslade Community College have been heard. Not only that, but Patcham parents have also had a raw deal. All these areas will suffer from lack of choice.

We have never had an easy entry into secondary schools here. It has always been a lottery for our children, but at least there was a chance of a choice. That will be denied us under the new system. If these proposals are voted in, our families will assume the burden as our choice is removed and our local school is denied anything near a comprehensive intake. We won't have the lottery, but we won't have the choice either - many of our parents want the choice more. Even then, comprehensive intakes are the most vital thing: if Falmer were given a more comprehensive intake, we might have been prepared to compromise. We are supporting Falmer, we have fought for a broader intake for the school all along; we want the school to have a chance to build on its "improving" status.

We are fed the supposed panacea of the Academy, and you will forgive us if we are skeptical. New buildings are all very well, but we are most concerned about opportunities for our children to learn and prepare for adulthood and the demands of the workplace. We want to know that the school will not be a Secondary Modern in Academy clothing. The emphasis on work related learning is all very well, but when the government wants 50% of teenagers to go to university, then you know that the job market will begin to require a degree as standard, and to study for degrees you need a good academic education. Vocational training is right in some cases, but can also narrow young people's opportunities rather than expand them. There are frequently articles in the press about our young people's failure to provide the workplace with basic skills (communication and numeracy) or transferable skills (languages, IT skills, analytical skills for example). Vocational training is all very well, but, I would argue, should not be the foundation for a child's education.

In addition, a real comprehensive education, in which children are exposed to a variety of people from different backgrounds, will give them confidence when they grow up to build good relationships with people from all walks of life. I regard this as equally important as it can counter the intolerance and prejudice born of ignorance, and open up new horizons for our young people. That is why I want a more comprehensive Falmer, and that is why the whole city should fight for a more comprehensive admissions system.

If you are against the SAR proposals, don't give up on the city yet. Give it one more chance to make the right decision. Get yourself down to Brighton Town Hall today at 4pm and scream your lungs out for your community, and for those areas that will lose out on diversity at their local school and choice!

Notice: Meeting for Coombe Road Schools parents tomorrow night

2007-02-21T18:41:00.000Z

There will be an important meeting at Coombe Road School tomorrow night, Thursday 22nd, at 7pm in the Main Hall.

Stuart McLaughlin, the head of Falmer, will be there to discuss the changes to admissions, and to talk about the proposed Falmer Academy.

All parents should attend as this is vital information about the education of your children. I would add that this meeting is only for parents at our school.

Please come and support the local community, the school, and your children!

Dorothy Stringer meeting a success

2007-02-21T18:39:00.000Z

Over 400 parents turned out for the Schools4Communities Dorothy Stringer meeting last night. The meeting ran until 10.15pm and many people in the audience had a good opportunity to ask questions.

Several councillors, including Kevin Allen (Labour, Preston Park), Ken Norman (Conservative, Withdean), Anne Norman (Conservative, Withdean), Vanessa Brown (Conservative, Stanford), Jayne Bennett (Independent, Stanford) and Pat Drake (Conservative, Withdean) were present. Juliet McCaffery, another Labour councillor for Preston Park, was present and joked that she was finally being given a chance to speak publically about the SAR - she was prevented from speaking at the Overview and Scrutiny Committee last week by her Labour colleague and Chair of that committee, Simon Battle. When she was introduced there was a spontaneous round of applause for her principled stand on the issue.

Anne Meadows could not attend, but she sent her apologies, and Cate Miller read the speech she gave to CF&S Committee on 2nd February.

MYTH BUSTING
What also became very clear was that so many parents thought that the new admissions system would not affect children in lower years. Children in years 4, 3, 2 and 1 will all be affected by the new admissions proposals!!!

Parents in what will be the Dorothy Stringer and Varndean catchment were also shocked to hear that the catchment will be oversubscribed and by upwards of 95 children. When you take into account the priority given to out-of-catchment siblings and to children with statements of Special Educational Needs (SEN), this looks like it will be an even bigger problem. Many of them did not realize that so many children could be sent out of catchment as a result of the lottery. Nor did they realize that the lottery would involve all the children in the catchment, not just a few.

LONGHILL MUM AIRED HER VIEWS
It was also good to meet a mum from Longhill. She spoke to the hall about the situation they face: that they will have a difficult intake with high levels of Special Educational Needs (SEN) and that the school will also be oversubscribed.

She was concerned that they would not have adequate funding and resources to support these children properly - children previously split into schools across the city and doing well under those circumstances. Her other fear was the the school would ultimately fail and that the city would have another COMART on their hands.

As places for pupils are at capacity the city cannot afford to lose another school. Their parents may have to go through a lottery that in Rottingdean they only found out how the proposals will affect them about 2 weeks ago. It's a dismally familiar story.

HEAD OF DOROTHY STRINGER SPOKE OUT AGAINST THE PROPOSALS
Trevor Allen expressed his concerns about the new proposals. He argued that as the schools are at capacity - that there is no surplus of places - that this would cause inflexibility and lead to failure in a fixed catchment system.

He was concerned that parts of the city have been set against each other by the SAR, and argued that what the city really needs - especially with so many new developments springing up - is a new school. He thought the Argus should front a petition from the City of Brighton & Hove to be sent to Whitehall requesting, as a special case, that we be granted funds urgently for the building of a new school in the city. He thought that this would help resolve some of the issues, and also bring the city together again.

What was also interesting was that the Working Group had been informed by council officials that the head teachers of Varndean and Stringer were being consulted on certain issues:

That the heads had been asked about adding classes to Dorothy Stringer and Varndean.
That they had agreed not to use the 10% places that could be assigned to children based on aptitude.
That they were talking to the heads about these schools not opting for Trust School status - which means they can set their own admissions criteria.

In each case, when Trevor Allen was asked what his response had been, he replied that he had yet to be asked. He went further and said that he hadn't had contact with education officials on Council for at least 3 months (Gil Sweetenham 3 months, David Hawker 4 months).

If Dorothy Stringer and Varndean did attain Trust School status, it would send the whole proposed fixed catchment system into turmoil.

He also suggested that David Hawker might find a way out of this problem by deciding to lead and drive a campaign for a new school for Brighton & Hove all the way to Whitehall.

Other speakers included ex-member of the Working Group, Martin Powell, who spoke eloquently about COMART and Kevin Allen who was concerned that the CofE representative on Scrutiny was being abused by councillors not happy with the outcome of that meeting (the return of the proposals to CF&S next Tuesday). Vanessa Brown also spoke briefly to offer her support to the campaign against the SAR.

SCHOOLS4COMMUNITIES SPEAKERS
Members of Schools4Communities spoke, including the Chair, Mark Bannister, Robert Eastwood, Paul Fellingham, and press spokesperson, Tracey-Ann Ross.

Mark Bannister gave a well-reasoned overview of the anti-proposals position, and set out some of the significant concerns for areas across the city including: Moulsecoomb, Bevendean, Coombe Road, Preston Park, Fiveways and Balfour, Patcham, Withdean and Westdene, parts of Hove, Hangleton, Portslade, Woodingdean and Rottingdean.

In addition, Robert Eastwood set out the future of the campaign. S4C are prepared to take the campaign all the way to Judicial Review. In the meantime, they will be providing more advice to parents on they difference they can personally make at the S4C website here.

The Argus have published an article on the meeting here.

Notice: Vital Meeting at Dorothy Stringer Tue 20th Feb 7.30pm

2007-02-19T20:16:00.000Z

There will be a Schools4Communities meeting tomorrow night, Tuesday 20th February, at Dorothy Stringer School, to discuss the Secondary Admissions Review.

All Parents - that's from all areas - are welcome.

This is a chance to put forward your views on the whole process and the outcomes.

This is also a chance for you to get involved in the struggle for a fair change to the distance measurement system.

You might want to find out who schools4communities are and what they stand for.

Or you may simply want to ensure that you stay informed in future by joining the Schools4Communities email list.

There will be updates on the review and the aftermath of the Children, Family and Schools Committee (CF&S Committee).

***This meeting is now doubly important as the Scrutiny Committee has returned the decision to the Children, Family and Schools Committee for another vote!***

Technorati Tags: CF&S Committee, Meetings, Notice, SAR, Secondary Admissions Review

Prophetic Quote from ex-head of COMART

2007-02-19T12:03:00.000Z

Jill Clough, the ex-headteacher of COMART School, wrote a book about her experiences called Why State Schools Fail: And What We Can Do to Fix Them (published by UIT Cambridge, 2005).

Someone has sent me the following quote:

"He [the Director of Schools] added that the Council had agreed to a more just admissions process, which might eventually help the school to recruit more students; but there would be no public discussion of the proposals before the local elections in May 2003, and another year of consultation before any decision would be made. There were many marginal seats and so the controlling Labour Party was afraid of provoking debate which might lose them.

"My feeling of exhaustion as I left the meeting was compounded by the thought that if the future of the children was to be manipulated, yet again, by political expediency, my work would be futile." (p.129)

This "more just" admissions process was presumably the move to distance measurement, which would have meant more QP kids going to Comart, had it remained open. But the delay helped to sink the school.

Is it ringing alarm bells? Are you thinking of Cllr McCaffery's dismissal from the Children, Family and Schools Committee by the Labour Group? Perhaps it is time for a change at the Council?

Technorati Tags: Brighton & Hove Council, CF&S Committee, McCaffery, SAR, Secondary Admissions Review

Email the Scrutiny panel about the decision

2007-02-15T14:40:00.000Z

It is really important that you write/phone/email and let Councillors on the Scrutiny Committee know what you think about the new admissions system that has been voted through. They will be making a decision about whether to send the vote back to CF&S Committee again.

To remind you of the CF&S meeting, Labour members on that committee all voted for the proposals, as did the Green Party member Richard Mallender. You should note that Kevin Allen (Labour, Preston Park) and Anne Meadows (Labour, Moulsecoomb and Bevendean) spoke out against the new system at that meeting. Moulsecoomb and Bevendean's local councillor, Jack Hazelgrove, voted for the new admissions fixed catchments, including the new catchment for Falmer that ends at Bear Road. The Conservatives, who have a policy of not supporting lotteries, all voted against the proposals, along with Jayne Bennett (Independent, Stanford).

The Scrutiny panel are meeting this coming Monday and need to hear how you feel about the decision made by the Children, Families and Schools Committee on the 2nd February, and also about what you think of the Secondary Admissions Review, and how it was undertaken.

When did you get to hear about the proposals?
Did you even hear before the decision was made?
And what do you think about the consultation with governors and the non-existent consultation with parents?
Do you think this is fair to "the city as a whole" as so many councillors have said, or do you think it moves the problem to other areas?
Do you think this is about Labour and Green groups fighting over marginal seats?
Will you be voting for Labour in the elections in May, and would you have done previously?
Do you think that the sacking of Juliet McCaffery was a disgraceful act that brought our democracy and the Council into disrepute?
Do you think that this follows the mandatory requirements of the new code of admissions to secure diversity and increase opportunity in ALL the city's schools?
Ask them what you should do if Falmer is not the right school for your child. How does this system improve choice for parents, particularly in the single catchments for schools like Falmer, Longhill, Portslade and Patcham?
Can you trust the Council to make the right decision and consider residents in Moulsecoomb and Bevendean when it comes to the question of the Falmer Academy after the shameful sacking of Juliet McCaffery from CF&S Committee on 2nd Feb?

Have a look at the article on this blog that details some flaws in the process here.

Children & Young People's Overview & Scrutiny Committee Members

Simon Battle (Chair, Labour, Goldsmid)
simon.battle@brighton-hove.gov.uk
01273 291139

Anne Giebeler (Independent, Goldsmid)
anne.giebeler@brighton-hove.gov.uk
01273 294364

Warren Morgan (East Brighton, Labour)
warren.morgan@brighton-hove.gov.uk
01273 294362

Jeanne Lepper (Hollingbury & Stanmer, Labour)
jeanne.lepper@brighton-hove.gov.uk
01273 291169

Georgia Wrighton (Greeen, Hanover & Elm Grove)
georgia.wrighton@brighton-hove.gov.uk
01273 294365

Kevin Allen (Preston Park, Labour)
kevin.allen@brighton-hove.gov.uk
01273 291197

Garry Peltzer Dunn (Wish, Conservative)
garry.peltzerdunn@brighton-hove.gov.uk
01273 291186

Dee Simson (Woodingdean, Conservative)
dee.simson@brighton-hove.gov.uk
01273 291178

Jan Young (Vice-Chair, Central Hove, Conservative)
jan.young@brighton-hove.gov.uk
01273 294361

Write to them:
c/o Kings House, Grand Avenue, Hove, BN3 2LS.

Potential Falmer Academy

2007-02-15T13:03:00.000Z

There has been talk of turning Falmer into an Academy, with private funding of £2 million from Jon Aisbitt, a city financier and member of the Times Rich List. If and when this is agreed, the government will inject a further £27 million into the school.

This would enable Falmer to replace the old school buildings and improve resources like classroom equipment, the school might even take on new teaching staff. It might also attain a specialist status in business and enterprise.

However, we are still concerned about Falmer becoming an Academy for these reasons:

• Will the building be built around the working pupils? This happened to children at COMART and it contributed significantly to the schools declined.
• How big will the new building be? Part of Falmer’s attraction is the space around the school. As an Academy, the school grounds might be reduced from their current 21 hectares size to a meagre and DfES minimum of 4.2 hectares. This would be a massive loss.
• If the school site is reduced in size, what will the Council do with the rest of the land? Are they going to sell it off to developers? Will they be building a 1,000 space car park, as has been suggested?
• What will the school's curriculum be? Academies have powers to set their own curricula, and we hear, for example, of schools incorporating creationism to the detriment of evolutionary theory as just one example of a 'weird' alterations to the national curriculum.
• Whilst we support vocational education, we also want to make sure that the school thrives across the curriculum so that children who want to achieve academically can, and that children are also encouraged in a wide variety of sporting, and cultural pursuits. We want these options to be open to children from the area, and for them to receive the support at home and school that they need to achieve their potential and to be fulfilled, happy and productive members of society who care about their community.
• How much will parents be encouraged to be involved with the school? Academies can limit parent involvement on the governing board. Local parents want to be heavily involved. They want a good proportion of parents on the governing body of the school. They want to feel that the school is working WITH their community and not working ON their community.
• Academies are the intended panacea for schools that are failing, and yet Falmer has a ‘satisfactory’ for its latest Ofsted report, and is 'improving'. Why are they doing this to Falmer School? There is concern that this will disrupt and undermine the school's recent improvements.
• There is also concern that this is linked in some way to a new football stadium at Falmer. The decision for the stadium has not been taken, but the idea of a stadium being built in the area is worrying, especially if the school is also to be rebuilt.
The way that the Council behaved over the SAR process does not instill confidence in parents already uneasy at the idea of Falmer attaining Academy status. If the Council does go ahead with these proposals, we do not think they will listen to the concerns of local parents. So far, they have not consulted with or contacted parents in the Moulsecoomb and Bevendean area about the Academy, and the decision is to be made in the Spring.

Parents from this area need more information.

Add your own questions and concerns as comments to this article.

How the decision affects parents in our area

2007-02-15T13:00:00.000Z

The Children, Families and Schools Committee decided, by a tight margin of one vote, to support the new proposals on secondary admissions.

That means all children in year 5 or below will go to schools according to a fixed catchment system. You can see a map of the new catchments on the Argus website.

Map of new fixed catchments

The Falmer catchment sits to the East of the Lewes Road, and runs all the way from Falmer village down to Bear Road taking in the areas of Moulsecoomb, Bevendean and Coombe Road on the Falmer School side of the Lewes Road.

For those of us in the Falmer catchment, you will be first in the queue, i.e. get priority, for a place for your child at Falmer. However, if you want a place at a different school then your child will be second in the queue. Some children will be able to get past this on the sibling link, i.e. they have a brother or sister at a school and so get priority at that school, as this link will continue until 2013.

The trouble is that as the number of school places across the city is so tight there is not much flexibility in the system. The dual catchments, i.e. they contain two schools, are for Dorothy Stringer/Varndean and Blatchington Mill/Hove Park. The Dorothy Stringer/Varndean catchment looks as if it will overflow as there are not enough places for children in the catchment and for the continuing sibling link. That means that any child from outside that catchment will not get a place in one of those schools, unless people inside the catchment decide not to send their children there. None of us think this is likely as these schools are so popular. The same is likely to be true of the Hove Park/Blatchington Mill catchment.

Those of us from this area campaigning against the proposals have been doing in part because, although we are constantly told we an still express a preference, the preference doesn't mean much when you are shut out of these schools. As these schools are the ones that get the best results - and folks, Ofsted and the League Tables were put there to help us to make a CHOICE about which school our child should go to - then, of course, many of us would like the opportunity to choose these schools.

BE FAIR TO FALMER
See the article on achieving a more balanced view of Falmer here.

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THERE ARE TOO MANY PUPILS FOR PLACES
If a school is oversubscribed there will be a lottery to decide which children get the places at the school. Children might have to go through several lotteries before they get into a school if all the schools listed on their admissions forms are popular. They might even end up without getting one of their preferred schools.

You can still express your preferences, and you should still list your preferred schools on your admissions form and not just write "Falmer" alone if you are in the Falmer catchment. If you want Falmer School, you may find the school is oversubscribed and should list other options as well.

DIFFICULT TO PREDICT
It is very difficult to predict what the results of the new admissions system next year for our children - and this is partly what we have been saying in our arguments against the proposals. One thing that is predictable is that Blatchington Mill and Dorothy Stringer will be oversubscribed and there will need to be a lottery to decide on places. The popular schools are more likely to have to have lotteries to decide on places.

POTENTIAL ACADEMY AT FALMER
See the blog article here.

WE WILL FIGHT ON
We are continuing to fight against the decision taken at the Children, Families and Schools Committee to get the decision reversed. Until it does, we have to prepare for the single Falmer catchment and what this means for our children. If the decision is reversed, we need to start thinking about ways the city might produce a fairer system for ALL the children who live in Brighton & Hove.

Be Fair to Falmer

2007-02-15T12:58:00.000Z

Some parents I have spoken to have been very anti-Falmer. Sometimes this is based on their own experience of the school as pupils themselves, and sometimes it is based on stories they are told and the reputation the school has had for years. One mother has recently told me that she sees children from Falmer School shopping and messing around on London Road during school hours. There's no doubt that a lot of bad things are said about Falmer.

Still, I'd ask you to be open-minded and fair about the school, and here's why and how you can do that.

The league tables also show Falmer doing well on the value-added score. That means that compared to schools with pupil intakes that get similar results in school tests at age 10/11 (Key Stage 2), Falmer does well at improving those childrens' results by the age of 15/16 (Key Stage 4). You can see the league tables for Brighton here, and you can click on the column headers to see how Falmer does for the value-added score.

But parents shouldn't just look at the league tables and Ofsted. You do have another way of assessing whether a school is right for your child. You should VISIT IT. In fact, you should visit all the schools that you would like to consider for your child, but don't miss out on Falmer as you might be surprised.

If you went to Falmer as a child, you might find that the school is a bit different now. Schools can change a lot in a matter of 1 or 2 years. GO AND VISIT THE SCHOOL. See for yourselves what they are doing to improve.

I have also been to see the school recently, and would definitely recommend you see it. They are doing a lot of good work there to make sure that the children thrive. There's a good atmosphere and the staff are in control, which is more than can be said for Varndean, which I also visited. In Falmer the children work quietly and seemed happy. They have also cracked down hard on bullying at the school and although no school can say there is no bullying, I think their methods are working well.

Even so, you may still decide that Falmer is not right for your son or daughter. Then, under the new system, you face a very difficult task in getting them into another school in the city. If this is the case - and after you have viewed several schools - then go and speak to your child's headmaster/headmistress and ask their advice.

I am also concerned about the proposals for a city academy at Falmer School. You can see why here.

WE NEED TO BE TEACHERS TOO
It is up to us parents, just as much as the schools, to educate our children; we have to be they to try to help them learn to write an essay and that is hard when you aren't sure yourself. Sometimes people think this is only the job of the school, but it isn't.

If you are nervous at the idea of helping your child with their homework, then talk to the school ask them to help you to help your child learn. Even if you can't explain their homework, what you can do is praise them and give them a hug when they make an effort. Sometimes kids suffer low self-esteem and can do more than they think they can, so to tell them that they can do more than they might think if they set their minds to it.

Ask them what they like doing and what they dream about being when they grow up and find out from the school how your child might go about reaching their goals.

Take them to the local library to borrow books, visit local and national museums. Have you ever visited the British Museum, or the Natural History Museum? - where they have life-sized mechanical dinosaurs and a fake earthquake. You own a little bit of those museums, they are yours. And, of course, we should get outside and play football with them, go for walks, visit friends and all the other things we usually do.

We have to support our children's learning by encouraging them to value their school and their school work, as well as teaching our children to be kind and polite to people, to support their peers and their community. We must celebrate their successes when they do well, and to encourage them to support others when they succeed, and also when fail. We all know bringing up kids is no easy task, and beyond the parents it is up to the whole community to encourage and support its youngest members to be happy, productive people who feel that the future is bright, that they can succeed whether they want to be a plumber, doctor, teacher, florist, chef, scientist, writer, musician or gardener. We hear so much about our children that is bad, so lets start to remind them how good they are.

Technorati Tags: Falmer Academy, puppy

How to Complain to the Council

2007-02-11T23:43:00.000Z

If you are unhappy with any aspect of the process of the Secondary Admissions Review, then you should complain to the Council asap. It is vital that you do all you can to reverse the decision.

Make it clear to the Council that parents in Moulsecoomb and Bevendean will not be ignored.

Information about the flaws in the Secondary Admissions Review are available in this article:

Flaws in the Secondary Admissions Review

COUNCIL COMPLAINTS PROCEDURE

There is information on how to make a complaint on the Council’s website here.

You can send your complaint to
Standards & Complaints Team, Brighton & Hove City Council, Freepost
SEA2560, Brighton BN1 1ZW

OR complaints@brighton-hove.gov.uk

OR free phone 0500 291229

OR fill in a complaints form here:

The online form gives you some idea of the format for complaints. You might want to send an email or letter so you have a copy of what you send for your own records.

You might also complain to the Standards Board at the same time - and state this in your complaint to the Council.

http://www.standardsboard.co.uk/

You can ask for action to be taken, for example, when complaining about the sacking of Juliet McCaffery, I will request the her reinstatement to the Children, Families and Schools Committee, and a re-run of the vote on the proposals.

Flaws in the Secondary Admissions Review Process

2007-02-11T23:39:00.000Z

Many parents are fuming at the way that the changes to secondary admissions have been made, and the way that their concerns have been ignored.

Here are some of, what we believe, are the worst examples of procedure by the Secondary Admissions Review and the Council during this last review. When you have read them you might want think about complaining to the Council.

1. The sacking of Juliet McCaffery by Simon Burgess, leader of the Labour group, at the eleventh hour. He said it was because she is only thinking about her constituents. We know that she is concerned about the whole city. She was at the demo on 6th January and listened to parents from across the city then; she also received emails from concerned parents from every area.

As far as we can see, Juliet McCaffery only put into practice no.6, Personal Judgement, of "The Ten Principles of Public Life" as stated in the Brighton and Hove "Code of Conduct for Members" which states
"Members may take account of the views of others, including their political groups, but should reach their own conclusions on the issues before them and act in accordance with those conclusions."

Meanwhile, Simon Burgess' actions can be seen as bringing into disrepute the very notion of democracy in this publicly elected body. By sacking Juliet McCaffery, he could be accused of breaking (4) and (5a) of the Code of Conduct for Members:

(4) A Member must not in his/her official capacity, or any other circumstance,
conduct himself/herself in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as
bringing his/her office or authority into disrepute.

(5a) [A Member] must not be in his/her official capacity, or any other circumstance, use
his/her position as a Member improperly to confer on or secure for
himself/herself or any other person, an advantage or disadvantage...

Find the Code of Conduct here: Code of Conduct for Members

2. The lack of consultation with many of the parents in Brighton and Hove, including those from Coombe Road School who found out about the consultation and proposals at the end of November 2006, parents from Bevendean Primary who found out just before the Christmas holidays, and others from elsewhere in the City who didn't find out until the New Year. Many parents still don't know. We want to know why the Council did not send out letters to all parents after at the beginning of the consultation process on November 6th, and why they did not properly consult with parents by sending out a questionnaire as they did the previous year? The Working Group

3. Failure to extend the consultation for a further 6 weeks after changes to the original proposals which had been presented to CF&S Committee at the beginning of the public consultation on 6th November. There are two alterations that require further consultation: the move south of the border to the Portslade catchment to the railway, and the change to the Patcham catchment to encompass Coldean. If they had moved the Falmer catchment boundary south they were intended to extend consultation. Why are these changes any different, since they were made well after the meeting on November 6th?

4. The Governors' meeting on January 8th at which a pro-SAR member of the Parent Stakeholder Group and Working Group, Sue Smith, was allowed to speak at length to those present about the benefits of the proposals and the effectiveness of the consultation and to answer questions from the floor. This was unbalanced and undemocratic, as no anti-SAR member of the PSG or Working Group were given similar privileges. Also, as a result, many governors did not get a chance to ask questions, and when they requested a further governors' meeting, they were flatly refused.

5. The "maps of injustice" posted on the Council website that originated with Sue Smith and, it was discovered, were in fact inaccurate. They were called emotively named "maps of injustice" and were clearly biased for the proposals.

We urge all parents angry with the way that the Secondary Admissions Review has been conducted, and with the way the decision was made at Children Families and Schools Committee on Friday 2nd February to write to the council and complain. See this article:

How to Complain to the Council

Juliet McCaffery sacked from Committee

2007-02-11T23:06:00.000Z

Juliet McCaffery was sacked at the last minute from the Children Families and Schools (CF&S) Committee by Simon Burgess, leader of the Labour Group on the Council. He stated that this move was made because she was only considering her own constituents.

To most parents across the city, this looks like a cynical move to ensure that the new secondary admissions proposals were passed.

The resulting vote was tied 5 votes all, which meant that the Chair, Pat Hawkes, Labour for Stanmer and Hollingbury, had the deciding vote.

You can see an Argus article on the sacking of Juliet, and readers comments, here.

What does this say about the democratic principles of the Labour group on our Council?

If you are concerned about the actions of Simon Burgess and the Labour group, email or write to the Council and make a formal complaint. Find out how to complain to the Council here. And read about other flaws in the process here.

Read the Schools4Communities letter to Pat Hawkes here. This gives details of the decision taken at the CF&S Committee including the shameful sacking of Cllr McCaffery.

Infringements of the Council's "Code of Conduct of Members"

As far as we can see, Juliet McCaffery only put into practice no.6, Personal Judgement, of "The Ten Principles of Public Life" as stated in the Brighton and Hove "Code of Conduct for Members" which states
"Members may take account of the views of others, including their political groups, but should reach their own conclusions on the issues before them and act in accordance with those conclusions."

Meanwhile, Simon Burgess' actions can be seen as bringing into disrepute the very notion of democracy in this publicly elected body. By sacking Juliet McCaffery, he could be accused of breaking (4) and (5a) of the Code of Conduct for Members:

(4) A Member must not in his/her official capacity, or any other circumstance,
conduct himself/herself in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as
bringing his/her office or authority into disrepute.

(5a) [A Member] must not be in his/her official capacity, or any other circumstance, use
his/her position as a Member improperly to confer on or secure for
himself/herself or any other person, an advantage or disadvantage...

Find the Code of Conduct here: Code of Conduct for Members

Technorati Tags: CF&S Committee, News, SAR

Governors' Meeting Last Night

2007-01-10T01:03:00.000Z

Coombe Road School parent governors, amongst many others, returned disappointed from their meeting with the Gil Sweetenham, Assistant Director for Schools and Chair of the SAR Working Group, as they felt that their concerns had not been heard. One of them simply remarked, "We are not happy people."

Two of the school governors waited with their hands raised throughout the discussion session to ask their question, but were never given an opportunity to do so. One of our governors, Natalie Channon, asked for another meeting, but was refused.

Sue Smith, one of the four parent representatives on the Working Group was present and sat at the front with Gil Sweetenham. After Gil's overview of about 30 minutes, and during the discussion session afterwards that lasted about 45 minutes Sue Smith was allowed speak at length in response to several questions. She has been a vociferous supporter of change from the outset and comes from one of the wards, Regency, that will benefit from the new proposals.

Why was she the only parent representative from the Working Group there? It seems that the Working Group parent reps were asked if they could attend the day before, and the others could not attend as they had commitments elsewhere. Fair enough, but then should she have been allowed to attend either if this was the case, especially when she already has a track record of bias for the proposals?

Tracey-Ann Ross of Schools4Communities was present and had been given permission to be there by Gil Sweetenham as she had an invitation from one of the governors at her junior school. She asked one question, but was not involved in discussion beyond that. She certainly did not get a chance to stand up and talk for the length of time that Sue Smith did.

ACTION

If you are unhappy with this meeting and feel it was biased send letters to the members of the CF&S Committee, to Gil Sweetenham, and to the Argus.

You can find details of who and how to contact people on this blog article:

Who To Contact And How

Technorati Tags: Meetings, News, SAR, Secondary Admissions Review

A Successful Demo That Made News

2007-01-09T15:10:00.000Z

About 50 parents from Coombe Road, Bevendean and St Martin's attended the protest on Saturday in Bartholomew Square.

The whole event was a big success, with Anne receiving a petition of about 3200 signatures from across Brighton which she has passed on to Gil Sweetehnam and the Working Group. She intends to speak about the petition and on behalf of anti-proposal protesters at the Children, Families and Schools' Commmittee on 29th January.

Many children came with brightly painted banners and big smiles to make their views heard, which they did very clearly throughout as they shouted, "We want choice!" and, "Think again" amongst other slogans.

Cate Miller spoke after the petition handover, calling out areas that had parents at the demonstration. These included: Portslade, Coombe Road, Bevendean, Moulsecoomb, Balfour, Surrenden, Westdene, Withdean, Preston Park and Prestonville. She made it clear that Schools4Communities demands are not unreasonable as she stated that change was needed, but not at any price. The cost to the children's education across large swathes of the city is too great. She also said that parents want proper consultation. There were cheers throughout.

The bad weather held off. As someone I know remarked, "God shines on the righteous!" Believer or not, this blog is obviously not in support of the proposals as they stand. What we want is not impossible to achieve: proposals that are set out reasonably; that are arrived at in a transparent process that makes data and evidence available for all to see and that are also informed by proper consultation with parents.

The protest achieved excellent publicity from the Argus and South Today. You can see the reports here:

South Today: Parents Protest In Catchment Row

Argus: Outrage Over Schools Plan

There has also been a report today about children that were missing from the original data used in the Varndean/Stringer dual catchment.

Argus: 66 "Lost" Children Fuel School Admission Row

NOTICE: FAMILY PROTEST AGAINST SAR THIS SATURDAY in CITY CENTRE!

2007-01-04T00:05:00.001Z

There will be a peaceful family protest against the SAR this coming Saturday 6th January 2007 between 1-2pm in Bartholomew Square in the city centre, during which a petition of nearly 3000 signatures will be handed to Councillor Anne Meadows.

There are many reasons why we are unhappy with these proposals, but first and foremost we in Coombe Road have an issue with the lack of choice parents will have under the new system. Children from our area have historically gone to many of Brighton's secondary schools and will now find themselves tied to Falmer only. One school does not suit all and parents want the right to be able to apply to schools that they think are best for their children, even if their child is not guaranteed a place at them.

We believe that Coombe Road loses out badly under the new proposals. But we have also lost out during the process of consultation as we did not become aware of the Secondary Admissions Review and the proposed changes until late November. We have just discovered that parents at Bevendean Junior School received no information through the school until a couple of days before the Christmas holiday!

We are hoping that other Councillors will attend and will witness the strength of parents' feeling on this and perhaps even talk to us there.

Parents from all over the city who are concerned about the proposals are invited to attend.

Parents from the Coombe Road area will have a banner and placard making session on Friday after school, 3pm onwards, at Coombe Road School.

If you want to come and help please do. Try to get hold of a cardboard box or two from the local grocers shop or Asdas. If you want to make a banner, you can probably get a cheap sheet from Roseby's and some 1inch baton to attach it to at B&Q. You may also need a good solid stapler. Bear in mind that you will have to transport these to the demo on Saturday yourselves, but a banner to represent each area would be great.
Good luck and see you there!

Technorati Tags: Notice, Petition, Protest, Demo, SAR, Secondary Admissions Review

Notice: Coombe Road School Action Group Meeting this Wednesday

2007-01-02T20:35:00.000Z

There is a Coombe Road (CR) School Action Group Meeting on Wednesday 3rd January in the School Hall starting at 7pm.

All Coombe Road and St Martin's parents are welcome. Please come and join the action against the Secondary Admissions Review if you haven't already.

You can bring your copies of the petition to hand in at the meeting.

We will also be planning CR School's part in the Saturday 6th January public handover of the complete petition in front of the media and, hopefully, some members of the Council. We want them to see how many of us are unhappy with the proposed changes to admissions and perhaps listen to some of our concerns.

The petition, started by CR School, has gone Brighton-wide. The petition handover itself has been organized by Schools4Communities:

http://www.schools4communities.co.uk

The Coombe Road and St Martin's parents have done extremely well and collected a large number of signatures from across Moulsecoomb, Bevendean and Coldean, so well done! And keep it up, as you can hand them in to the Coombe Road School Office as late as the morning of Thursday 4th January.

Look forward to seeing you at the meeting.

Technorati Tags: Meetings, News, Notice, SAR

Sign the Petition Online - It's Not Too Late

2007-01-02T20:24:00.000Z

If you haven't signed the petition yet, you can still do it online at the COHORTS website!

And if you have, but know people who might like to, forward the following website address to them:

www.cohorts.co.uk

Those of you who are knocking on doors, keep up the good work!

Technorati Tags: News, Petition, Secondary Admissions Review, puppy, SAR

Notice: Green Party meeting to discuss Academy

2007-01-02T20:20:00.000Z

The Green Party are holding a meeting downstairs in the Terrace Bar & Grill on Marine Parade on 9th January from 7.15-9pm, donations welcome, and the proposed Falmer Academy is on the agenda.

Alex Knutson, a member of Unison, the union that many of the city's council workers belong to, is to talk about concerns that Unison have over the proposed Academy.

While the Green Party have supported the SAR proposals for fixed catchments, they are very concerned about the Academy. Take a look at this article, published on the Green Party website on 2nd October 2006:

Tangled web of Falmer Academy: Greens call for clarity over school deal

Meanwhile the BHCC website for schools provided the following information for local teachers and schools employees:

BHCC continuation of 14th October 2005 newsflash

and the Council produced a press release on November 5th 2005:

Brighton & Hove Council Press Release

If you want to know more about what the Academy means for Moulsecoomb and Bevendean's children, it might be worth attending this meeting.

Technorati Tags: Falmer Academy, Green Party

News: Letters in the Argus

2007-01-02T20:04:00.000Z

Well done to all those parents who have managed to get their views published in the Argus over the last few weeks.

1. Mark Bannister of Withdean Crescent who writes in support of FSM banding (Friday 29th December)

2. Sam Type wrote the following letter, which was published on 23rd December (letters published between 23-26th December are not available online)

Dear Paul,

As a parent living in the BN1 9 postcode, I am astounded by the proposed changes to secondary school catchment areas, like Kevin Legan (23rd November). Have the council completely lost sight of their own goals of inclusiveness and fairness?

Along with many others in this less-affluent area of Brighton, I am placed in the ‘dual’ catchment area for the two worst performing schools in Brighton and Hove (according to OFSTED) – Patcham High and Falmer. In fact, as a result of successful petitioning by parents, it seems even Patcham High will not be available to my son because we don’t live in Patcham.

Why have the proposals failed us?

The first failing appears to have been the selection of the Working Group. No one seems able to explain how the group of parents was chosen. They were supposed to represent us all. I wasn’t asked, nor were any other parents from Coombe Road. There were no representatives from Coldean, Moulscoomb, Coombe Road, Bevendean, Hollingdean or Hollingbury and, not-surprisingly, those areas will suffer the most from the proposed scheme.

The parents who were chosen live in Queen’s Park, Hanover and Hove Park. All areas that have now been included within the proposed catchment areas for the best-performing schools (according to OFSTED) – Dorothy Stringer and Varndean.

I am not suggesting that those parents connived to be chosen and then sat down and came up with a proposal aimed solely at benefiting their own children, but without an equal voice given to parents representing all areas of our City, how can the Working Group have been expected to fully understand all our needs?

If the group is supposed to be truly inclusive, then why were only the affluent areas of the City represented?

Having failed so miserably to chose a truly comprehensive group, I supposed it should not be a surprise that the resulting scheme is also not 'comprehensive'.

It seems that the proposed catchment areas have been drawn along lines of affluence in our City. Most evident, perhaps, in the crooked line that marks delineation between Kemp Town and Whitehawk – only the residents of Kemp Town can send their children to Dorothy Stringer and Varndean.

The average house-prices for the catchment areas (taken from the Land Registry figures for July 2006) is an interesting point of reference. The average house-price for the Dorothy Stringer/Varndean catchment area is £225,026. At almost £20,000 less, the average for Falmer/Patcham is £205,876.

So it seems that £20,000 is the cost of better education for Children in Brighton and Hove. Nice if you can afford it.

We are told the consultation process is still going, at least until 12th January 2007. But the people who decide which proposal goes forward is exactly the same Working Group who made the proposals in the first place.

And the response of the Working Group to our concerns?

Sam Type
Coombe Road parent

3. Mr A Craggs on the school admissions lottery
4. Sue Dawson, Canfield Road, Brighton

Further letters to come. I am waiting for a copy of the paper so that I can type them out.

Technorati Tags: Argus, Letters, News

Notice: Coombe Road School Action Group Meeting this Wednesday

2006-12-31T17:02:00.000Z

Technorati Tags: Meetings, News, Notice, SAR

A Morning Photoshoot

2006-12-30T18:25:00.000Z

Parents and children from CR School turned up on a freezing cold morning for a photoshoot for an opinion article to go into the Argus on Thursday 21st December which you can read on the blog here.

At least ??? of you turned up at 8.45am to show your commitment to forcing changes to the proposals that would leave children in Moulsecoomb and Bevendean with only one choice of school, Falmer. Historically, children from this area have been sent to Falmer, but also to Patcham, Varndean and Longhill. We object to the way that our choice of what would be the best secondary school for our child is about to be taken from us. There is no one size fits all!

The photographer from the Argus was - for some strange reason - under the impression that we would be demonstrating outside the school. As we were in the playground waiting, she drove past. When we finally got hold of her she returned to take a photograph that appeared in the final Argus article. Some parents had to go before the photographer turned up, but the photo above was taken when we were all there. Thanks to everyone who came.

News: Argus Opinion Article on 21st December 2006

2006-12-30T17:03:00.000Z

The following article appeared in the Argus Opinion section (p.8 of the paper) on 21st December 2006:

Will new plans for school selection be fairer to city's families?

Proposed changes to Brighton and Hove's secondary school admissions policy have divided the city's parents. The city council plans to create a system of catchment areas which would guarantee every child a place at a nearby school. Under the current system, parents specify their top three choices of schools, and, when a school is over-subscribed, the children living nearest receive priority. But this means families that do not have a school near their home rarely get their first choice. The new system is intended to make this fairer by creating priority catchment areas. Parents would still make three choices but they would be guaranteed priority at one or two of their nearest schools. For a map of the catchment areas, go to www.theargus.co.uk.

NO

Tracey-Ann Ross, from the Schools4Communities group, says the proposed changes will make the system even more unfair. The group includes parents from Carden, Patcham, Stanford, Balfour and Coombe Road schools. She has children at Stanford Junior School in Brighton.

"Why is there upheaval in secondary school admissions? With only 15 spare spaces in the system, there is no room for flexibility.

The current distance measurement ensures local children access local schools. The vast majority of children (93 per cent) get one of their three preferences. Ninety per cent get their first choice.

The other seven per cent live further than 2.5km from any school. They have less chance of obtaining any of their three preferences. They are directed to schools with places left. These children come from many areas including south-east Brighton and wards such as Moulsecoomb, Westdene and Portslade.

These new proposals solve problems only for south-east Brighton

As there is no capacity in the system, others will lose out and must take up the unwanted places.

The problem does not go away but is merely shifted on to children in other areas.

Disadvantaged communities (Moulsecoomb, Bevendean, Stanmer and Coldean that sent 38 kids to Stringer and Varndean and 72 to Patcham in 2006) will lose out. Some 60 children from Prestonville and Westdene, who can walk to Dorothy Stringer, will have to travel four miles to Hove Park Lower in Hangleton.

And, with the introduction of a lottery system, any child in any area could lose out in the ballot and be sent to a distant school with no friends. Even if they live next door to a school.

Supporters of the proposals have presented south-east Brighton's gain as an improvement for the whole city but it is not. This complex system - untried anywhere else in the country - will create new problems, unnecessary worry and uncertainty for hundreds of children.

The new proposals introduce a combination of catchments, a lottery and equal preference. But even those who drew up the proposals admit they are not certain how this combination will work in practice.

Catchments have been drawn up by council officials, without proper consultation with parents. They will create artificial boundaries and divide communities.

There are changes that can be made that really could be fairer for all children in Brighton and Hove but until this late stage the council has not seriously considered them.

And whatever the claims about consulting people, until recently most parents had no idea what was planned. We do no oppose changes to make the admissions system fairer but we do oppose the council rushing to introduce a system that won't work.

That is why thousands of concerned parents have signed a petition against these changes and are asking for consultation. We urge the council to listen to them."

YES

Chris Bourne is an unofficial spokesman for parents in several areas of the city who currently cannot be guaranteed to get their children into their nearest schools. His children attend Somerhill Junior School in Hove.

"Since the precipitous introduction of the safe walking distance policy in 2004, the negative effects have got greater year-on-year. The disenfranchised areas of the city who cannot access their nearest school get bigger while the 'golden halos' around the popular schools get smaller.

The number of people not getting any of their top three choices and then being 'directed' to a distant school gets larger every year. Children from Somerhill school were allocated to seven different city schools last year.

There are 'reliable rumours' that Dorothy Stringer school will be massively over-subscribed for September 2007 entry. This implies that many people think they live close enough to get in when in fact they don't.

Under the first preference first system operating in conjunction with safe walking distance, they have effectively wasted their first preference and many will find they can't get their second or third choice because others live closer.

Under the current system, it really is a gamble trying to get your child a place at a secondary school. You have to second guess the preferences of other parents and you need to consider how far away you live from each school in your list.

Is it then worth adding an additional emotional and financial element to your gamble by actually moving house? If so, how near do you need to move?

It really is not surprising that people are acting against their own best interests in filling in their preference forms!

The current proposals were designed to end the geographical iniquity and with six key factors in mind: access to preferred schools; links between schools and communities; increased opportunity for children to transfer with their peers; travelling distance; parental preference and enabling a better spread of children.

The proposals admirably achieve these objectives. The use of catchment areas in conjunction with the use of the equal preference system and a ballot to allocate places to over-subscribed schools will enable access to all children in the area, provide peer group and community access to the schools and, over time, achieve the aim of bringing up the less favoured schools.

The ballot enables everyone to have an equal chance of accessing their preferred school. After initial allocation, any discrepancies, such as where someone who chose an under-subscribed school but was allocated to an over-subscribed school, will be removed by means of the computer swapping places to give the maximum possible number of highest placed preferences being satisfied.

Under this system, all Somerhill children will have access to Blatchington Mill and Hove Park schools. There are many people around the city trying to maintain their current privileged position and many of the suggestions for more consideration seem simply tactics designed to ensure the current iniquitous policy continues yet another year."

Technorati Tags: Argus, News, SAR

News: Download Radio 4's "You and Yours" - It's about the SAR

2006-12-14T21:08:00.000Z

This last Monday Radio 4's "You and Yours" covered the Secondary Admissions Review.

Pat Hawkes is interviewed and seems to think that most parents will be happy with the proposals for fixed catchments, and that they will solve the problems in the city. This interview did occur several weeks ago, and I hope that she will listen to the large numbers of parents who are shocked and upset at the proposals.

Download an mp3 file of the programme here.

How Does the Fixed Catchment Affect You? Tell Us Your Story

2006-12-12T22:12:00.000Z

Let us know how the new proposals for the fixed catchment for Falmer in 2008 will affect you. Post your stories and opinions on this article - you can leave them anonymously.

What will you have to do if the fixed catchment for Falmer goes through in 2008?
How will it affect you and your community?
How do you feel about it all?

If you do not how to post a comment, look at my explanation here:

How to Post a Comment

Notice: Meeting at Coombe Road School on Tuesday

2006-12-11T13:48:00.000Z

There is a meeting on Tuesday 12th December at 7pm, Main Hall, Coombe Road School, for parents concerned about the proposals of the Secondary Admissions Review.

Please come along and support our communities to ensure that the regeneration of Bevendean and Moulsecoomb continues and is not undermined by the new fixed catchment for Falmer/Patcham (and especially for Falmer), and also that our choice of schools for our children is not removed. One school does not suit all.

Hope to see you there.

Notice: Coombe Road School Christmas Fair Tomorrow!

2006-12-08T17:42:00.001Z

The Fair starts at 11am on Saturday 9th December at the School. All welcome!

Keep checking the Friends of Coombe Road website for information on events at the school in the run up to Christmas.

http://www.friendsofcoomberoad.org.uk/

Looking forward to seeing you at the Christmas Fair.

Notice: Get Heard at the Labour Advice Surgery Saturday 9th December

2006-12-08T12:56:00.000Z

Our local councillors for the Moulsecoomb & Bevendean wards including the Coombe Road, Tenantry & Meadowview areas, are holding their next Labour Action Team advice surgery at Manna Deli in Coombe Road on Saturday 9th December between 10am-11.30am.

I envisage that the venue will possibly not be large enough! Please use this opportunity to vocalise your thoughts in person to those that 'should' be fighting for us!

Please bear in mind that this is the same day as Coombe Road school's Christmas Fair which starts at 11am so be sure to come to the fair too!

Write to Members of the Children's Families and Schools Committee

2006-12-08T12:11:00.000Z

Here are the members of the Children, Families and Schools Committee, who will make the final decision on the Secondary Admissions Review proposals put together by the Working Group. It is strongly advised that you email them as soon as possible to let them know of your concerns about the Secondary Admissions Review. If you haven't yet written to them, get writing now.

You can write to these Councillors at:
c/o Kings House, Grand Avenue, Hove BN3 2LS

Email addresses are given below.

Try to ask some questions in your letters/emails as you are more likely to get a reply.

Jayne Bennett
Independent, Stanford Ward
jayne.bennett@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Vanessa Brown
Conservative, Stanford Ward
vanessa.brown@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Pat Hawkes (Chair)
Labour, Hollingbury & Stanmer
pat.hawkes@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Jack Hazelgrove
Labour, Moulsecoomb & Bevendean
jack.hazelgrove@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Lynda Hyde
Conservative, Rottingdean Coastal
lynda.hyde@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Sue John
Labour, South Portslade
sue.john@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Ted Kemble
Conservative, Wish
ted.kemble@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Richard Mallender
Green, Preston Park
richard.mallender@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Juliet McCaffery (Vice Chair)
Labour, Preston Park
juliet.mccaffery@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Ken Norman
Conservative, Withdean
ken.norman@brighton-hove.gov.uk

You might also - if you have some time on your hands (I know, unlikely as it's Christmas!), a strong writing hand and if your writing is fairly legible (hmm) - like to hand write your letters to demonstrate how passionately you feel. However, that's quite some feat when you have so many people to write to, so this is by no means expected.

Advice on Action to Take!

2006-12-08T12:09:00.000Z

If you are unhappy with the proposals of the Secondary Admissions Review, do all or some of the suggestions for action given below.

If you are already doing these things, then well done! And please keep doing them, we mustn't let the pressure drop before the vital Childrens, Families and Schools Committee meeting in January. (Although we will all need a few days off for Christmas.)

Keep writing to Councillors, and it is now important to contact members of the Children, Families and Schools Committee with your concerns, especially if you haven't yet done so. Keep up the pressure.
Write to Gil Sweetenham , the Assistant Director of Education, and ask him why he did not consult every parent, and why Free School Meals banding was thrown out so quickly and not modelled.
gil.sweetenham@brighton-hove.gov.uk
Write to the Editor at the Argus and to the editors of national papers like: The Guardian, The Independent, The Times, The Sunday Times, and The Observer on Sunday.
Contact our local MP, Dr Des Turner, and tell him it's not too late to do something about the proposals put forward by the SAR. Ask him for his support.
Sign the Coombe Road School Petition at the School Christmas Fair on Saturday (starts 11am).
If you are not at Coombe Road School, contact
enquiries@schools4communities
and ask them to send you information about starting a petition at your school.
Talk to other parents in the playground about the Secondary Admissions Review when you pick up or drop off your children. Many of them are still not aware of the proposed changes, and need to be informed. Some parents do not have the Internet, and gossip is a great way to keep them in the information loop. Also, families in Bevendean and Moulsecoomb may not realise that the changes will not just affect their children, but will affect the community in other ways, for example residents leaving the area and landlords buying up properties.
Write your comments about the Secondary Admission Review to
myview@schools4communities.co.uk
As these will be collated, printed, and sent to the Children, Families and Schools Committee by Schools4Communities. This will ensure that your thoughts on the SAR are passed on properly to those Council members.

News: Meeting at Park View pub on Wednesday night

2006-12-08T10:18:00.000Z

Parents from across Brighton arrived at the Park View pub on Monday night, all unhappy at the new proposals of the Secondary Admissions Review. The meeting was organized by a group of parents and concerned residents who call themselves "schools4communities".

www.schools4communities.co.uk

There were so many people present that two separate meetings had to be convened and the results collated at the end in a third meeting. We finished near midnight when the pub staff threw us out.

There is widespread and passionate opposition to the proposals of the Secondary Admissions Review (SAR), alongside a willingness to committed and co-ordinated action to try and prevent these changes from taking effect.

Parents are shocked that more effort was not made to ensure that they were all aware of the process of development of the SAR proposals since the beginning, and also more effort was not made to involve parents on the PSG from areas such as our own.

There was strong support from other areas for families from parts of Stanmer, Coombe Road, Coldean, Bevendean and Moulsecoomb, who face the possbility of a single fixed catchment for Falmer. Drawing such a high proportion of children from deprived social backgrounds into one school creates a narrow social mix that is unfair and looks like social exclusion.

In Falmer's case, they are making improvements, but my concern is that under the proposals for fixed catchments from 2008, that these improvements will be damaged by a potentially larger intake of social deprivation. The new system simply moves the issue of Falmer School from the central East Brighton wards to the more comprehensive mix around the small area of Coombe Road, an area that on its own will make little difference.

I would be very interested to speak to Falmer School and find out what they think of the SAR's proposals. I also want to know more about the improvements they have been making.

There is no easy solution to the situation that we currently have, brought about in part by the closure of COMART and the imbalance of schools in East versus West Brighton. Moreover, the lack of schools in the East is not the only issue. The largest deprived areas are in this part of the city too, so that Falmer ends up inevitably under the proposed system as the school with the highest level of social deprivation, and the least comprehensive intake. The areas in the East of the city drawn into catchments for better schools are generally more affluent.

Schools4Communities are now co-ordinating a Brighton-wide campaign, and if you would be interested to represent Moulsecoomb, Bevendean, or Coldean in the group, or to support the campaign, please contact them at:

enquiries@schools4communities.co.uk

News: Moulsecoomb Leisure Centre Meeting on Monday

2006-12-07T10:48:00.000Z

Several parents attended the Moulsecoomb Meeting at the Leisure Centre on Monday.

The agenda did not specifically deal with the Secondary Admissions Review (SAR), but was concerned with development issues around the Lewes Road area, and many of those attending were older residents in the area. Those parents from Coombe Road who were there decided it would not be appropriate to raise the issue of the Secondary Admissions Review at the meeting. The speaker was Liz Hobden from the Council's planning department. Discussion was mainly about land usage and road and transport infrastructure to the area.

Cllr Anne Meadows mentioned an academy at Falmer briefly in the context of discussion about the proposed Falmer stadium. Quoting the parent who sent me this information:

"She is obviously a big fan of the Academy and sounded like she really wanted to push it at all costs - her main emphasis being on creating training and life-long learning opportunities for local unemployed and links with the football club."

What also emerged is that consultation with residents on the Council's 20 year development plan is a consultation which finishes on the 21st December. Surprise suprise! Residents have only just found out about the plans. The regeneration of the Lewes Road Area may well be an issue for you, and there is no reason why you should not contact members of the Council about this too - although do keep working on the SAR!

Here's some information on the Council's website for the Regeneration of the Lewes Road Area. Again, difficult to find more than this
http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/index.cfm?request=c1145688

And this is info on the proposed Preston Barracks regeneration scheme:
http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/index.cfm?request=c1113778

And this is the web page for the whole larger scheme across Brighton & Hove:
http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/index.cfm?request=c1120682

I am going to leave it at that now on the regeneration and concentrate on othe SAR, but if any of you find anything useful here relating to the SAR, please add it as a comment or email us on:

saynotothesar@gmail.com

Thanks for patiently waiting for this post, it's been a busy few days. And a big thanks to the parents who attended the meeting and passed this information on to me.

Notice: Sign the Petition at Coombe Road School on Wednesday

2006-12-05T08:17:00.000Z

There will be another opportunity to sign the petition at Coombe Road School at 3pm in the Junior Hall on Wednesday when you pick up your children up.

Even if you are happy with the fixed catchments, come and talk to other parents and find out what it actually might mean for you. It isn't just about your child's education, it will have a big impact on the local communities in the Falmer catchment.

Click on these links:
Letter to send to Councillors and a list of
Who to Contact and How
if you want to do more.

You can find other information and articles by clicking on the blog archive on the right-hand side of the homepage. Some of the older posts are hidden now, so if you click on the arrows in the archive you will make them visible.

A useful website

2006-12-05T08:14:00.000Z

The following website is full of lots of useful information about the Secondary Admissions Review, and argues that it has not been thorough, because it has failed to consider some important options. Take a look.

www.schools4communities.co.uk

I did publish this on an earlier post, but thought it deserved another mention and a post of its own.

Notice: Meeting in Park View Pub this Wed 8pm

2006-12-04T21:34:00.000Z

One of the parents at the Balfour School meeting sent this out:

"How about meeting on Wednesday the 6th December at 8pm in the Park View Pub to plan our next steps after a very successful meeting last night, good turn out!! Please let me know if you can make it. It would be good to get a cross sections of schools and areas represented."

It would be good for us to build links across the city. The only way we will really turn this round is if we all work together, so if you can go on Wednesday do, because every face will help. The parents from the Varndean/Stringer catchment have concerns that overlap with our own. You will be welcome.

How to Post a Comment

2006-12-04T21:22:00.000Z

Yes, I guess it's not easy after all, and after a request, I thought I'd write an article to help.

1. If you want to comment on an article here, then you need to click on the pale blue "comments" link at the bottom of an article. You'll be taken to the comment page.

2. You can fill in your comment in the box where the cursor, or text line, is flashing.

3. After that you'll need to click to select whether you want to post from either:

a. your gmail account, if you have one, but most of you will probably want to select "other" or "Anonymous".

b. "other": you can just put in a first name/surname name, or an alias (Marta Hari, Ghandi, Bart Simpson, whatever you like), and you can leave "your web page" blank, unless you have one and you want to put it to go in as a link at the end of your comment.

OR

c. "Anonymous": the easiest to use, as you are not required to put in a name.

4. When you have selected the right one and added the details you need to add, then go down to the bottom of the page and click "Publish Your Comment".

That's it. I hope.

With any luck, I'll check shortly afterwards and get it put up on the website. You'll be a published writer at this point.

I'm moderating comments to make sure that they are "family friendly," i.e. no swearing or malicious personal attacks. I will happily put up comments that disagree with my point of view as I'd rather a good honest debate than evil censorship.

Councillors and Civil Servants Open Your Ears!

2006-12-04T21:08:00.000Z

This is a bit of a rant, and hopefully it will give you a chance to let off some steam too. Do you feel like you are being treated like an idiot, or not really heard? Then read on. Otherwise, go get a cup of cocoa and take a break from the stress.

I get a strong sense that the Council are just not singing off the same hymn sheet that parents are. Whenever the Council Official speaks at a public meeting - so far Gil Sweetenham - I hear the same arguments repeated over and over again. It's that broken record assertiveness technique at which he is so astonishingly adept, and which makes officials everywhere so hard-of-hearing when it comes to parents and their concerns. Open up your ears Mr Sweetenham!

And this public representation of the Working Group leads me to sense that it just does not recognise the overwhelming agreement between parents who say, "We want social justice to be the primary criteria by which you design your proposals, because we want all our children to get a good education." One parent at the Balfour School meeting last week put it well when they said that the system would not be fair until all the schools in Brighton are good schools.

Social justice means ensuring a comprehensive intake for all our schools. A comprehensive intake involves making sure that a schools intake comes from across a wide variety of backgrounds: this is usually agreed to produce the best performance for children across the board, whatever their needs, and rural schools usually do better in this sense as they have a larger catchment area with a broader spectrum of children. Ideally this would include rich, poor, working class, middleclass, or from different cultural backgrounds, religious denominations, and so on, although it is very difficult to ensure that sort of variety of a mix. It all promotes a richer learning experience in which children are less likely to be isolated because no group dominates particularly.

So, surely the Secondary Admissions Review should promote this over and above any other criteria for selection? And how will the possible single catchment for Falmer manage this at all? It seems to me that it will lead to a "ghetto" school. I suspect that it would have a less comprehensive under the new fixed catchment in 2008, than it does currently.

So you might think that the point of the admissions review is to give parents choice, but apparently it is not about choice. Mr Sweetenham told us it's about being able to express a preference. But how can you express a preference if there is no choice?

OK then, surely if there is no choice it's about creating good schools all round and educating children. Isn't that what the education system is about? Admissions are therefore a hugely significant doorway to that period of secondary education as they enable that comprehensive intake? But under the proposed fixed catchments, this doorway becomes so much more significant because the future is so much more uncertain for some children faced with a "ghettoized school".

Free School Meals
When I spoke to a council employee last week about the Admissions Review, I asked how important sharing Free School Meals allocation between schools has been. Free School Meals (FSM) are an indication of deprivation, and under a comprehensive school system, those kids from deprived backgrounds would be spread across all the schools in the city. They said it wasn't a "main consideration", then said it was still "important". They admitted that transport, links between schools and communities and the simplicity of the process were, "considered more highly...maybe." Well, this is certainly echoed by officials at public meetings: that's their mantra and it shuts out the sound of "social justice" and "comprehensive" when it comes to Falmer.

Best for "the whole city"
When Gil Sweetenham says that fixed catchments are the best solution for the "whole city", that doesn't just mean children, it means businesses, students, and residents - maybe the Council too. "Hooray!" you may say, but shouldn't the primary beneficiaries of any admissions process be all our children. After all, the whole city can only gain in the long-term from all our childrens' succeeding.

Transport
I can see the Council's eyes light-up with a Swiss efficiency at a smooth transport system, requiring no extra effort on the their part to put on school bus services for children as they can use already existent bus routes. I think the Council see fewer cars on the roads taking children to school, so that local business is not disrupted by the school run.

Even so, there are a lots of children in East Brighton who will be travelling some distance to their local school. Fact is, there are not nearly as many schools in the east of the city. Many parents will still prefer to drop them off by car when no dedicated school bus service is available. And the big question remains, "So, Mr Civil Servant, exactly how does this marvellously efficient transport system based on all those colourful maps ensure our children get a shot at a decent secondary education?"

Can I add as a warning to all parents that seeing the kids going to Falmer run the gauntlet each morning from the bus stop across the slip roads to the A27 gives me the shivers every time I pass.

A simple admissions system
Then, they want parents to be able to understand a simple system. In this way, perhaps the Council will be able to avoid the emotional and financial burden of appeals against the admission results by distressed parents and kids? Then again, a simple admissions process may lead to years of complex difficulties for children sent to sub-standard schools - and by "sub-standard" I mean a school that is only "satisfactory", because "satisfactory" is not good enough for any child.

Links between schools and communities
And I keep hearing about links between schools and communities, but I'm sure what this means exactly; it sounds suspiciously like empty spin. What would these links achieve if the school is not providing a good education for children? Surely that's the first priority, and a responsibility not simply of the local school, but of the city of Brighton & Hove as a whole. I'd rather my child travelled some distance and received a decent education, than that they were able to walk to school, but received a "satisfactory"one (and that's the fragile state it is currently in at Falmer, it may change post the 2008 fixed catchments).

The nod they give to social justice is slight and insincere. All the talk of each catchment taking its share of socio-economic deprivation is about keeping us quiet - more spin. The pill still tastes bitter. Do they really think any parent in the now proposed Falmer 2008 catchment are stupid enough to believe that our Free School Meals quota will evenly balanced with other catchments? No, they will be significantly higher, perhaps as high as 50% - correct me if I'm wrong Mr Sweetenham, but that's what I thought I heard at the Balfour School meeting and that's what I wrote down. Patcham's would be 8%, and other schools would get around 23%.

Don't they understand that until they make sure every school receives a comprehensive intake that the schools themselves will not get a chance to rise above that "satisfactory" level? Admissions is about ensuring equality of opportunity above all else, by ensuring that every school takes the strain and starts from the same position on intake. Fixed catchments deny a preference simply because they deny choice in the single catchments. And if you want real choice make sure all the schools are good.

So, for those Council Officials who replay that record over and over again, please stop and actually listen to parents who are talking more than sense, they are saying something that is actually right.

Come and sign the Coombe Road Petition on Monday!

2006-12-02T11:05:00.000Z

On Monday 4th December at 3pm after school in the main hall you can come and sign the petition. We need as many signatures as possible.

This isn't just a problem for parents, as the proposals may damage the neighbourhood. If people move away to other catchment areas house prices may fall and we lose the diversity we are getting.

If you can, please come along.

Notice: Moulsecoomb Community Forum on Monday

2006-12-02T11:00:00.000Z

On Monday 4th December at 6.30pm in the Moulsecoomb Leisure Centre there will be a meeting of the Moulsecoomb Community Forum.

Items on the agenda include Lewes Road development, the proposed stadium at Falmer, environmental issues and students.

If the fixed catchment areas goes through, then families may leave, and when they do, more students may move in creating an imbalance between permanent residents and people passing through the area. Some residents are very concerned about this.

If this and/or fixed catchments concerns you, please come to the meeting.

Notice: Coombe Road School's Christmas Fair 9th December

2006-12-01T11:42:00.000Z

Who To Contact And How

2006-11-30T13:16:00.000Z

You can email people, or send a letter to them at the following address:

c/o Kings House, Grand Avenue, Hove, BN3 2LS

Members of the Children, Families and Schools Committee (CFS): they are responsible for the final decision on the proposals put forward by the Working Group.

The letter that Coombe Road School provided for you to use, or to use to help you write your own letter, is on the blog here. You can just copy and paste it into your wordprocessor, add your address at the top, and sign it at the bottom.

Ken Norman
ken.norman@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Juliet McCaffery
juliet.mccaffery@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Richard Mallender
richard.mallender@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Ted Kemble
ted.kemble@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Sue John
sue.john@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Lynda Hyde
lynda.hyde@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Jack Hazelgrove
jack.hazelgrove@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Vanessa Brown
vanessa.brown@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Jayne Bennett
jayne.bennett@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Pat Hawkes (Chair)
pat.hawkes@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Council Officers
Alan McCarthy, Chief Executive, Brighton & Hove
alan.mccarthy@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Gil Sweetenham, Assistant Director of Education
gil.sweetenham@brighton-hove.gov.uk

David Hawker, Director of Education
david.hawker@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Local Councillors
Anne Meadows, Labour Member for Moulsecoomb and Bevendean
anne.meadows@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Jack Hazelgrove, Labour Member for Moulsecoomb and Bevendean
jack.hazelgrove@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Jeane Lepper, Labour Member for Hollingbury and Stanmer
jeane.lepper@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Member of Parliament for the area
Dr Desmond Turner MP
179, Preston Road
Brighton
BN1 6AG
Telephone: 01273 330610
Fax: 01273 500966
turnerd@parliament.uk

Write to the Argus
Letters to the Editor
Argus House
Crowhurst Road
Hollingbury
Brighton
BN1 8AR
editor@theargus.co.uk

News: Outraged Parents at Balfour School Meeting

2006-11-30T10:00:00.000Z

The turnout for the Balfour School Meeting was high: at least 200 parents were there concerned for their childrens future from a variety of schools. I heard questions for Patcham, Westdene, Downs, Balfour, and Coombe Road. Others of you there may have heard a few more.

They were addressed by three speakers, Gil Sweetenham, the Assistant Director for Schools, Martin Powell, who is the representative for Preston Park Ward on the Parent Stakeholder Group and is also on the Working Group, and Robert Eastwood, a parent of a child at Balfour School. Tony Jones, the Headmaster of Balfour School, chaired the meeting.

The meeting was incredibly valuable, and I left feeling hopeful that an alternative solution might be reached as it seems we are not the only ones dismayed by the proposals. Parents were in fighting mood, and the general opinion was that fixed catchments were a bad idea. Only one parent openly supported them, asking Gil to be allowed to say something positive. Every other point raised seemed to try to undermine the proposed fixed catchments. Among the concerns raised were:

the distances pupils will still have to travel,
the possibility that their children might end up at Falmer - one woman was prepared to break the bank and send her child to private school instead,
a sense that the fixed catchment idea was designed to placate a few parents from Queen's Park and the Hanovers,
the feeling that parents had not been consulted properly throughout the process: that they knew little of it until the proposals were already put forward,
and a strong sense that a duty to social justice - good schools for all, not just the richer families - was not possible under these proposals.

One parent summed it up at the end when they said that no system would be fair until every school in Brighton was a good school.

Robert Eastwood argued that a fairer means to allocate places would include sharing the deprived children across the city's schools by means of a system called "FSM banding", or "Free School Meals Banding". This had never been examined in depth by the Working Group as an option. It would be a way of ensuring all schools have a comprehensive, or socially broad, intake.

It was especially pleasing at the end of the meeting to hear Martin Powell say that he would request that this system be modelled properly by the Working Group. Gil Sweetenham looked surprised at this turnaround. For me, this was a hopeful end to a tempestuous and sometimes bitter meeting.

The results of the Secondary Admissions Review will only benefit the whole city if the whole city is included. Under the current proposals for fixed catchments, it seems that the children from areas less likely to complain, from areas already disenfranchised (left out), have their needs for a good education sacrificed. Thankfully, this issue is not just ours; we are not alone in our outrage at these proposals; there are others fighting for a fairer system.

More Detail

Gil spoke at length in support of the fixed catchments, adding a few extra reasons to the selection he presented Coombe Road parents with on Monday. It appeared that he was responding to queries he'd received from Balfour parents by email and trying to close down some of the objections in advance. These included:

Why not build another school in East Brighton? Because funding would not be given as pupil numbers are staying the same;
Why not add an extra class to over-subscribed schools? Perhaps they would, if there was a call for it, but that would have to be widespread.

He also tried to placate us with some snippets of information:

The news that Learning Skills Council (LSC) is planning a new system, whereby pupils would be registered at a school, but able to take classes anywhere across the city. (However, this isn't due for 5 years, and looking at the LSC website, they deal with education for over 16s);
He added that the review sought to redress the imbalance for families in the Wards along the seafront from Whitehawk and Queen's Park who, under the current system, were highly unlikely to get their first choice of schools. These parents have complained hard about their situation to the Council over the past few years;
And of course the proposed Academy at Falmer.

Martin Powell stood up and tried to placate parents concerned about the choice between Dorothy Stringer and Varndean, as Varndean is seen as the "poor kids' school". He added that if it came to a ballot in the dual catchment, then all people would be treated equally.

There seemed to be a lot of fire-fighting going on, with Martin and Gil both attempting to douse the blaze before it got out of control. It became evident why when Robert Eastwood spoke. He went through some figures, and exposed the fact that it is unlikely that "the catchment will catch". In other words, there will be too many children in the catchment for Dorothy Stringer and Varndean, and those children will have to go out of the catchment to other schools. This would be decided by the ballot, and parents and children would be living in a great deal of uncertainty until the results were known. Ultimately, some of those children might well be sent to Falmer.

Mr Eastwood argued that "FSM banding" might be a better model, FSM meaning "Free School Meals". This was an option that the Working Group never examined, and may result in a more comprehensive, or socially broad, intake of children in the schools across Brighton. Under this system, all schools will have a spread of children from poor to rich backgrounds. No schools would just take the poorer children, or just take the richer children.

You can read more about "FSM banding" this on his website:

http://www.schools4communities.co.uk/

Let us know what you think of the FSM banding idea and of all schools having to take some of the children from economically deprived backgrounds.

Finding your way around this blog

2006-11-29T17:39:00.000Z

In case you haven't seen a blog before, I thought you might like a few tips to find your way around.

On the homepage you'll see the articles listed down the page, and you can read them from here. You can also click on the header for the article and just view that article on its own.

On the top right of the blog homepage, under the title, you have the "Blog Archive". You can see the headlines here in puple, and if you click on the month, you can see past articles. This is great if you want to check out when the next event is going on as you won't have to scroll down the page to find it. All events will start with "Notice:..." so they can be seen easily.

At the end of each post, or article, there is a pale blue link called "Comments". If you are looking at the article on the blog homepage instead of clicking on the article headline and looking at the article page, you will not be able to see the comments, but you should be able to see how many there are. Wherever you are, you can see the comments, and add one yourself, by clicking on the "Comments" link.

Please comment, even if it is only a brief expression of support. We want the Council to know that there are lots of us who are unhappy with this fixed catchment solution. You can always do it anonymously.

Letter for Coombe Road parents to send out to Councillors etc...

2006-11-29T16:41:00.000Z

To make your lives easy, here's the letter that Coombe Road School sent to you to use as a for your own complaints. You could also use it to help you to write your own personal letter.

Copy and paste the following letter into a document on your wordprocessor, add your address at the top and a signature at the bottom, and you can send it to one of the people on the "Who to Contact" sheet - the same list is found here on the blog.

The Letter

Dear

As a parent of a child at Coombe Road School, I would like to express my total opposition to the proposed new secondary admissions procedures. By placing our area in the catchment area for Falmer and Patcham schools, we are effectively being denied a choice. This lack of choice will be diminished still further if the amendment tabled by the Patcham parents leads to Falmer becoming a single catchment area.

The working group appears to have failed in all of the criteria it set itself:

We have no access to our preferred school unless it happens to be Falmer (or maybe Patcham), currently two of the worst performing schools in Brighton & Hove;
Our travelling distances will not be improved, as neither Falmer or Patcham schools are nearer to our area;
Coombe Road currently fosters, and would want to continue to foster, links to many schools, but this will be cut down to two, or even one;
Parental preference will only be met if we prefer to send our children to the least well-performing school(s). Any preference to send them to a successful secondary would only be considered in the virtually unheard of event of Dorothy Stringer or Varndean being undersubscribed;
Year Six children will not have increased opportunities to transfer with friends from primary school. On the contrary, any families who are able will begin the process of moving to 'a better catchment area' not only splitting friends, but leading to the breakdown of the local community, and negative impact on the primary schools within the Falmer catchment area;
The final point that this proposal will lead to a better balance in the spread of children from deprived wards would be laughable if it were not so offensive. The two successful Brighton secondaries have not only been incomprehensibly put in the same catchment area, but will be served by a carefully drawn catchment consisting of virtually all the affluent and middle-class areas of Brighton. On the other hand, Falmer will be served by only the less affluent areas of the city. A sprinkling of children on free school meals have been added all round, in a superficial attempt to make this seem fair.

All children should have the right to be educated at a good secondary school, and parents should have the right to choose where their children are educated. These new proposals deny any meaningful choice to large areas of the city and will increase the social divisions of the current admissions system. Children living in the BN2 4 area of the city will be severely disadvantaged by these proposals, and for this reason, we urge you to reconsider them.

Yours sincerely,

Angry parents from Coombe Road confront Assistant Director for Schools

2006-11-29T15:20:00.000Z

On the evening of Monday 27th November some Coombe Road School parents joined Mrs Dykes and Mr O'Sullivan at the School to discuss the proposals on fixed catchment areas put forward by the Secondary Admissions Review (SAR). Gil Sweetenham, who is Chair of the Working Group that has put forward these proposals, was present to talk about the SAR and answer parents' questions.

Gil explained that Secondary admissions were never to be about "choice" for parents, but instead that parents were allowed to state a "preference". This is still the case with the fixed catchment areas, and parents will still be able to get their child into a school outside the fixed catchment, if there are not enough applications for that school. And what is the likelihood of Dorothy Stringer and Varndean being undersubscribed.

The reasons behind fixed catchments included:

Making the admissions process simple and transparent;
Maintaining community ties, so that as many children as possible go to a local school;
Using current bus routes to avoid disruption of the transport services.

Of course, most of us found this baffling, as Falmer is further away than Varndean or Dorothy Stringer for many parents in the Coombe Road area. At the same time, the reason for some of the bizarre results is perhaps down to the fact that East Brighton has fewer schools to serve it than the West of the City, hence their "local" school is further away: in particular, the south of the city along the seafront to the Queen's Park Ward - the Wards that campaigned for a different system originally as they found their children falling outside the Varndean and Stringer distance measurements and ending up at Falmer.

When I spoke to Colin Race, Gil Sweetenham's assistant, on Monday afternoon, he stated that transport was a main consideration - although he then qualified that with "maybe". Social deprivation, on the other hand, was important, but not as important as the three reasons Gil gave above.

Gil explained that a great deal of thought and effort had gone into this process, and pulled out a colourful map most could not see as it was A4 and too far away. No number of colourful maps, however, could convince us that the situation is fair for our children.

When they got their chance, the parents were vocal in objecting on the grounds of:

the lack of representation for our Ward in the meetings of the Parent Stakeholder Group and the parent focus groups of our area;
a lack of representation and consultation that was down to shamefully bad communication with parents in our area by the Council;
the boundaries of the catchment area all-too-conveniently sectioned off the poorer areas of Brighton to the worst schools - particularly if those of us in Bevendean and Moulsecoomb are only left with Falmer in our catchment area.
a fixed catchment for Falmer/Patcham - now possibly only Falmer - would discourage people from moving to the area and lead to people moving away, a fall in house prices in our Ward. This would also result in a less diverse community and a growing and unbalanced student population.

The bottom line is that the SAR does not look fair - and quite literally when you look at the map. The dual catchment for Varndean and Dorothy Stringer appears to have little to worry about. Meanwhile, we have been offered Patcham and Falmer, two of the worst performing schools in the city. What's more, we may only end up with Falmer school, as Patcham residents attempt to annex the school.

The Varndean/Dorothy Stringer catchment also excludes most of Whitehawk, not to mention Hollingbury and Coldean. So, quite frankly, the Working Group's proposals for the SAR look hugely unfair and biased no matter what way they try to sell it to us.

Gil Sweetenham shrugged his shoulders much of the time, and at points he didn't seem to know what to say.

It is vital we get active and do everything we can to promote a fairer system. We need all the help and support we can get, so, if you can, please join us and help out. I'll be posting articles on the blog about how to take part in the campaign, and the progress we are making.

Notice: Meeting tonight at Balfour Junior School

2006-11-29T15:12:00.000Z

There will be a meeting at 7pm tonight, Wednesday 29th November, at Balfour Junior School.

The Balfour Parents have invited parents from Stanford Junior and the Patcham area, but also welcome any other parents concerned about the new proposals on secondary school admissions.

We hope some of you will be able to come.

Unannounced Visit to the Parent Stakeholders Group

2006-11-28T20:01:00.000Z

Two parents, paid a surprise visit to the Parent Stakeholders Group (PSG) meeting this evening, Tuesday 28th November.

They met our representative, Claire Jackson, a long-term resident of Coombe Road, and passionate about the area. She pledged her commitment to represent the Ward on the PSG.

They then asked if they might speak to the Group on behalf of the parents of Coombe Road School. Gil Sweetenham requested they leave the room while the members of the PSG made a decision. The Stakeholders Group was kind enough to give them the opportunity to present their views.

This is the speech they gave:

"This message is from the parents and children of Coombe Road School. Our parents come from a wide catchment that includes Bevendean and Moulsecoomb.

"You have spent the last eight months or so dedicating your time to this Secondary Admissions Review and have worked hard to put together the proposals that were made by the Working Group at the beginning of November. You acted as representatives for your Wards in a system which should encourage debate and negotiation in order to achieve a solution. We respect your efforts on behalf of the City.

"However, throughout the process our School received no information from the SAR; our school received no request for a member to join the Stakeholders Group; our school was not included in the public meetings held during the second half of the summer term; no representative from our Ward was present at any meeting throughout the process; and no parent received any correspondence direct from the LEA or the Council regarding focus groups or the Parent Stakeholder Group. Had we been aware of our lack of representation, we would have made every effort to rectify it.

"Our lack of representation is dismaying on its own. In addition, we are dismayed at the results of the SAR, which left us with a choice of the two worst performing schools in Brighton; although now it seems that we will only have one choice, and that all children from our Wards, areas not represented in the process, will be sent to Falmer school. More galling still is the fact that our Ward abuts the areas within the catchment for two of the best performing schools in Brighton. The parents in the next door catchment area are blessed with the best outcome for their children, who have a great start to their secondary education, and a promising future.
This review is unjust to our children. It is unfair that they be so easily banished from the privileges that a good education brings. The new Falmer fixed catchment amounts to social exclusion, ensuring that Falmer school never receives the comprehensive intake that might enable it to flourish.

"The results will be a longterm ghettoization of our Wards. Who would choose to live in a catchment area that leaves their children with a substandard education? We want our communities to flourish, to grow, to change and improve, but this sounds the death knell on that possibility. Our children deserve opportunities to learn, and to become valuable productive members of our society. These proposals, blatantly unfair, do not promise the best for our Wards, or ultimately for Brighton and Hove.
There is no even distribution of deprivation and disadvantage. This is a further disenfranchisement of people already shamefully excluded. I urge you to rethink the proposals and to request that the review place a higher value on social justice.

"Thank you."

Get Involved Now!

2006-11-27T21:50:00.000Z

There's a meeting of the Parent Stakeholders Group on Tuesday 28th November, 7pm at Hove Town Hall. These are the people who were supposed to be representative of our interests through the process of the Secondary Admissions Review.

It is vital that we now have our views heard by the Parent Stakeholders Group. This meeting is our first opportunity to change the Review, and time is short. We only have until January 12th to get our voices heard and the sooner we start the better.

The Parent Stakeholder Group consists of about 23 parents and carers from across Brighton. However, only one person on that group, Claire Jackson, was from the Coombe Road/Bear Road area; her child goes to St Martyns. As far as we can tell, she was brought onto the Parent Stakeholder Group very late, in mid-September 2006. We wait for confirmation on an actual date.

There was no representative from Moulsecoomb/Bevendean on the Parent Stakeholders Group during the entire process of this Review so far.

The bottom line is that we don't think our views were represented on that group, or on the Working Group, which consisted of:

Councillors: 2 Labour, 2 Conservative, 1 Green Party, 1 Liberal Democrat
A parent governor from Cardinal Newman
4 representatives of the Parent Stakeholders Group who came from Preston Park, South Hove, Central Brighton and Hanover
3 local authority officers

After the meeting on 12th January 2007, the Working Group will send their proposals to "The Child, Families and Schools Committee" who will make the final decision about the Secondary Admissions Review and therefore the admissions process in 2008.

Please try to come tomorrow. We want to get our voice heard by the Parent Stakeholders as soon as possible to impress on them our fears for our children's future, but also for the future of our community, if the only choice for our children is Falmer.

I hope we will see some of you there.

SAY NO TO THE SAR!

Coombe Road Meeting Wednesay 21 March 7.30pm

So Much for Equal Opportunities or Choice in Education

***Notice: Demo at CF&S Decision Meeting Tonight!***

Notice: Meeting for Coombe Road Schools parents tomorrow night

Dorothy Stringer meeting a success

Notice: Vital Meeting at Dorothy Stringer Tue 20th Feb 7.30pm

Prophetic Quote from ex-head of COMART

Email the Scrutiny panel about the decision

Potential Falmer Academy

How the decision affects parents in our area

Be Fair to Falmer

How to Complain to the Council

Flaws in the Secondary Admissions Review Process

Juliet McCaffery sacked from Committee

Governors' Meeting Last Night

A Successful Demo That Made News

NOTICE: FAMILY PROTEST AGAINST SAR THIS SATURDAY in CITY CENTRE!

Notice: Coombe Road School Action Group Meeting this Wednesday

Sign the Petition Online - It's Not Too Late

Notice: Green Party meeting to discuss Academy

News: Letters in the Argus

Notice: Coombe Road School Action Group Meeting this Wednesday

A Morning Photoshoot

News: Argus Opinion Article on 21st December 2006

News: Download Radio 4's "You and Yours" - It's about the SAR

How Does the Fixed Catchment Affect You? Tell Us Your Story

Notice: Meeting at Coombe Road School on Tuesday

Notice: Coombe Road School Christmas Fair Tomorrow!

Notice: Get Heard at the Labour Advice Surgery Saturday 9th December

Write to Members of the Children's Families and Schools Committee

Advice on Action to Take!

News: Meeting at Park View pub on Wednesday night

News: Moulsecoomb Leisure Centre Meeting on Monday

Notice: Sign the Petition at Coombe Road School on Wednesday

A useful website

Notice: Meeting in Park View Pub this Wed 8pm

How to Post a Comment

Councillors and Civil Servants Open Your Ears!

Come and sign the Coombe Road Petition on Monday!

Notice: Moulsecoomb Community Forum on Monday

Notice: Coombe Road School's Christmas Fair 9th December

Who To Contact And How

News: Outraged Parents at Balfour School Meeting

Finding your way around this blog

Letter for Coombe Road parents to send out to Councillors etc...

Angry parents from Coombe Road confront Assistant Director for Schools

Notice: Meeting tonight at Balfour Junior School

Unannounced Visit to the Parent Stakeholders Group

Get Involved Now!

Notice: Demo at CF&S Decision Meeting Tonight!