IN THE NEWS PAGE 1, KEEPING YOU IN THE KNOW!Mostly factual, possibly even trivial but we guarantee you will know more than you did 5 minuets ago, so READ ON! |
|
Need to know the weather for the next few days? then just click on this link and find out http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/5day.shtml?id=2064 |
|
Campaign to Save Rogate School from Closure · FACT: West Sussex County Council has put forward a recommendation that Rogate School closes in September 2010 · FACT: There has been no consultation with parents, staff or governors to date on this recommendation - the consultation has to date only been about the Age of Transfer · FACT: We are launching an appeal against this recommendation · FACT: There is a 6 week consultation period from 27th February to 8th April where people can represent their views. · FACT: We can do something about this · FACT: This is our school in our community and we are the people that can change this recommendation.
Rogate School Governors are compiling a case detailing why this is the wrong recommendation and why Rogate School should stay open. You can begin this by attending the public consultation meeting at Rogate School on Thursday 6th March starting at 7pm. ROGATE SCHOOL NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT NOW!
This is YOUR chance to make YOUR views heard to the decision makers ACT NOW! You can help, put forward your reasons why the school needs to stay open through these methods below:
Appeal to the decision makers: · Mark Dunn, Cabinet Member & The final decision maker, – mark.dunn@westsussex.gov.uk - 01243 753526 · Jeremy Taylor, Director of Education (Diocese) - jeremy.taylor@diochi.org.uk · Robert Back, Director for Children and Young People's Services - robert.back@westsussex.gov.uk - 01243 777750 · Colin James, Head of Resources, colin.james@westsussex.gov.uk - 01243 777751
Lobby our local government representatives: · Andrew Tyrie, MP, tyriea@parliament.uk - 01243 783519 · William Mason, Chichester District Council, wmason@chichester.gov.uk, 07982 728018 · Nola Hendon, Rake/Rogate Councillor, nola.hendon@westsussex.gov.uk - 01730 893970
Submit an official view that will contribute to the appeal process: · Complete the online response form at: · Send an email to the official feedback address: lyndsay.coggin@westsussex.gov.uk · Write to the official feedback address: · The Director for Children and Young People’s Services: Lyndsay Coggin. WSCC. Ref RV. 10 Room. 106 County Hall. Chichester. PO19 1RF.
Contribute to the school’s appeal against this recommendation: · Send an email to: rogateschool@gmail.com · Write a letter of support to: “Keep Rogate School Open” Rogate CE Primary School. Rogate, Nr Petersfield, Hants. GU31 5HH · Sign the petitions that will be distributed to local outlets
Attend one of our weekly campaign meetings at the school: · 6th March, 7pm – Public Consultation · 13th March, 7:30pm – Keep Rogate School Open Meeting · 20th March, 7:30pm – Keep Rogate School Open Meeting · 27th March, 7:30pm – Keep Rogate School Open Meeting · 3rd April, 7:30pm – Keep Rogate School Open Meeting. For further information and details on how you can help, please ask at the school, email rogateschool@gmail.com or phone on 01730 821 329 You can Download the Consultation Document that makes this recommendation by clicking here. |
|
BUT ITS NOT JUST ROGATE SCHOOL UP IN ARMS! Both Rake & Hollycombe Schools are affected under this out of the blue, local government plan to “rationalise” our school system. Under these new proposals, Rake & Hollycombe would be “Amalgamated” to become an all through CE (Controlled) primary school operating on both sites Age Range being 4-11. It is proposed that these schools would be amalgamated under the leadership of 1 Headteacher and 1 Governing Body. Once again we find major changes and upheavals being proposed with no prior consultation. The only question previously asked of School Staff, School Governors, Parents or Parish Councils, was a simple do we think it a good idea to change from a 3 tier system to 2 tiers and as such, fall inline with other local education authorities, to which most of us said yes, but yes to this idea only, there was no mention of closure or amalgamation of schools. NO REDUNDANCY PAYMENTS ARE BEING OFFERED! In a move that a more cynical person might call “slightly devious” it is being proposed that all staff, at all six (6) primary schools, will have to “REAPPLY” for a position at any of the remaining five (5) schools, thus it is claimed, if they are reapplying for a job, they are not redundant. West Sussex County Council are saying, we are given to understand, that nobody is therefore being made redundant but that they merely have to apply for a post in any of the remaining schools, so need to pay out any redundancy. Perhaps this is being over simplistic but when we went to school if you take 5 from 6 you are left with 1. Therefore if 1 school is forced to closedown you will have the members of staff from 6 schools fighting for position in the remaining 5, ergo some people will not have a job because you will have more staff than you now need, how is that not making some existing staff in effect REDUNDANT, Clever or What? Perhaps when we went to our much loved small local village school’s, we were taught higher values of loyalty and respect than are deemed necessary or required in this “modern world” we all find ourselves in today? Please Note: The Rogate Parish Council Chairman has called for a Extra Ordinary Parish Council Meeting set for 7.30pm on Monday 10th March 2008 in the Pavilion at Rogate V-Hall, to run alongside the Planning Meeting already set for that night. |
|
Inaccuracies in the discussion document “Planning Rother Valley Schools for the future” A personal point of view, as written by Ian Croucher. Web-Editor for the www.rogate-rake.org Website.
Green = Extracts from the proposal. Blue = Web-Editors personal & considered comments.
Page (3) Introduction WSCC Statement: There was a full and healthy debate with parents, staff, governors and the wider community on the educational, demographic and financial drivers for change, which received wide support. Sorry did we miss something here, I thought the local communities were asked about our thoughts on a new 2 not 3 tier system, no mention of school closures.
Page (4) 2. Demographic & Financial, WSCC Statement: We have also seen a significant fall in the number of children living in the area. This raises questions about the efficient use of resources. _ Between January 2000 and January 2007 the number of pupils attending the 17 first schools serving this area fell by 13% (1681 pupils dropping to 1455); 1681 minus 13% = 1462. A drop from 1681 to 1455 = 13.44% but figures can mean what ever you want them to mean these days. HM Government statistics only very recently realised, indicate we are on the threshold of a new BABY BOOM, but what do they know!
Page (4 & 5) What You Told Us, WSCC Statement: Some 4500 copies of an initial consultation booklet about the proposed reorganisation of educational provision in the Rother Valley from September 2010 onwards, were distributed at the beginning of November 2007 to parents, staff and governors at schools in the area. Copies were also sent to pre-school providers and to strategic partners including Chichester District Council, the Learning and Skills Council and the Church Diocesan authorities. The first round of consultations came to a close on 19th December 2007, following two public meetings attended by some 350 people in November. Put your hand up if you knew about the “Public Meetings” we could attend! The North Chichester County Local Committee also considered the key issues set out within the consultation booklet at its meeting in December 2007.
Almost 400 people responded to the first phase of consultation. That is equal to only (if your into figures like WSCC) 11.25% of the questionnaires sent out?
WHY SO FEW RETURNED, probably because most people thought they were being asked a question, that most of us had been saying needed doing for years and assumed (oh what a mistake we all made here) that as it was a commonsense idea in the first place, WSCC would just get on with it.
Had the full and detailed questions been asked properly in the first questionnaire, i.e. What are your views on school closures, I suspect the reply would have been a resounding NO! not in the hundreds this time but in the thousands.
The question must therefore be asked: Is this poorly devised first questionnaire, considered a good base to decide our local communities future on, I DON’T THINK SO!
WSCC Statement: Of those who responded in writing, via the online form or via e-mail, 78% (301 out of 387) agreed with our proposal that schools in the Rother Valley should be reorganised so that children transfer to secondary school at the end of Key Stage 2 of the National Curriculum.
Only 18% (68 out of 387) disagreed with this proposition and 4% (18 out of 387) did not have a particular view. In addition, 74% (286 out of 387) of respondents agreed that the potential advantages of reorganisation outweighed the disadvantages. Only 19% (72 out of 387) disagreed with this view and 7% (29 out of 387) did not state a particular view.
Over half of the responses received were from the parents of pupils currently attending Rother Valley schools; around a third were from those who specified themselves as ‘other’, followed by governors, teachers and pupils respectively. Does anyone see in these statements of peoples responses, anything about school closures?
WSCC Statement: Key issues raised during the consultation process included: · a request to consider how new and further improving secondary provision could best be provided for the whole area;
· the need to take full account of the positive features of small rural schools and their importance to their local communities; So closing small, local, community schools is how WSCC is taking full account and is considered by them to be a positive feature!
· the vital role which transport will play within any reorganised pattern of school provision; mainly because WSCC is going to have to lay on loads of School Buses, if this proposal is carried out + putting 4 year old children on a bus especially with no escort provided is a good idea, who are these “professionals” who worked all of this rubbish out, they can’t be people blessed with any commonsense at all! or presumably children of their own.
· the importance of providing appropriate information and support for school staff at a time of significant change; Is that to be the same way you consulted the staff at these local schools with a letter out of the blue informing them of WSCC ideas about closing their school?
· the need for very careful planning by the Local Authority and current schools in order to minimise any disruption for children which might arise from the reorganisation of the present three-tier system; Closing a local community school is not considered disruptive than?
· appropriate levels of capital investment in order to ensure that Rother Valley pupils benefit from the best possible learning environments; How by selling of prime real estate to raise money to help with the cost of reorganisation? How long before developers appear like vultures in the sky and try to build a nice new executive style housing estate smack in the middle of Rogate? Mind you if they all have children, we will need a community school to teach them in, wont we?
· the suggestion that Year 6 pupils should still have access to appropriate specialist teaching provision following any age of transfer changes. Well wouldn’t they be expecting that anyway, just more WAFFLE!
There is now significant support for the view that the present three-tier system is unsustainable and should be replaced by a more viable pattern of provision with fewer but larger primary schools feeding into one secondary school. Who said or voted for anything about “Fewer & Larger Primary Schools” or did I miss that somehow?
A consistent theme in responses has been the importance of ensuring that children of all ages across the Rother Valley have access to the best possible quality of educational provision. So the answer is to close small community schools down and herd all the children together under one far bigger roof is it!
Page (6) Inclusion, WSCC Statement: The County Council will expect Rother Valley schools, following any changes agreed to the age of transfer, to continue:
· to provide for local children in accordance with the School Admissions and Special Educational Needs Codes of Practice; WAFFLE!
· to secure inclusive outcomes for vulnerable children including those looked after by the County Council, young carers & those who have special educational needs or disabilities; WAFFLE! and finally,
· to work in partnership to enhance the specialist support. JUST MORE WAFFLE!
In order to support this development, wherever possible schools will have a flexible community space which will create opportunities to offer access to activities such as childcare, family support, family learning, adult learning and skills and activities for children beyond the school day. None of these statements are to be considered new or groundbreaking, its just sounds good and pads the report out.
School governors, in consultation with the local community, will make the decisions on the use of such spaces so that they complement provision already available locally. Like the school governors and local communities have up till now, been consulted on school closures and amalgamations!
Schools in the Rother Valley are keen to work with the local community partners to provide access to childcare and activities for children from 8am–6pm and to make school facilities more widely available for use by the local community as part of the Every Child Matters programme. So are WSCC really saying here that they are going to Bus the children to school in-time for a Pre-School activity starting at 8.00am, the bus then transports them home at 6.00pm. What happens to those children who don’t want to do pre-school or after school activities, are WSCC going to run a shuttle-bus service, I DON’T THINK SO! What happened to bringing “Local Communities Together” or for all our concerns about our “Carbon Footprint”
Page (7) What do we mean by “Amalgamation”? WSCC Statement: In order to amalgamate the schools, the County Council will propose formally to close the existing schools and open a new primary school from September 2010 with a temporary governing body to oversee appointments and all other key decisions for the new school. This provides equal safeguards for staff and pupils of all schools affected, or, a very clever way of getting out of redundancies? If as you claim, you are “Formally Closing” the existing schools why are you sidestepping the issue of redundancy by making staff reapply for a job?
Access to Schools, WSCC Statement: As part of the proposals for each school we will be looking to improve the working environment within the school for pupils and staff and ensure all schools are more accessible to people with disabilities. Only a short time ago, WSCC spent more than £ 70,000 putting in a “Hygiene Unit” This unit is specially designed for handicapped children, with a special toilet, shower, overhead gantry system to get disabled children in & out of wheel chairs and much more, no other school has this unit as far as we are aware!
We will also be conscious of the wider impact of our proposals and seek to ensure that access to school sites, walking and cycling routes are improved where possible. Who fancies the idea of children walking or cycling to Rake School which is situated right beside a very fast moving road (formally the main A3) or Stedham School along the main A272 with all its massive lorries and high volume of cars etc. or even Harting School, coming across children around the numerous blind bends can you imagine the carnage? No Thanks!
We will work with communities and governing bodies to develop appropriate school travel plans which support sustainable travel to and from school, including walking and cycling. We will also work with schools and transport operators to provide and facilitate suitable transport arrangements to meet statutory responsibilities and curricular needs e.g. 14-19 diplomas.
Page (9) Rogate CE Primary School (Controlled), WSCC Statement: The school currently has only 41 pupils on roll, an average of 7 pupils per year group and so has over half of its places unfilled. Only 39% of the children come from within its existing catchment area. Under our preferred option of closure for the school, we would wish to discuss with existing parents how the offer of a place at the nearest alternative school sites at South Harting, Rake or Hollycombe would best suit their children’s needs from September 2010. Interestingly but not being bothered to be mentioned here! some children come from the Rake & Petersfield areas to attend Rogate School thus proving it works both ways, so nothing new or unusual there. I wonder how many children in the area, go to Private Schools, perhaps that is why numbers are dropping in the local “State Schools” I have nothing against private schooling per say but if we are being quoted all these facts and figures, why not give the whole picture instead of a distorted and biased view.
WSCC Statement: We recognise that pupils from the Rogate community would need to travel to alternative school sites, as many already do, let’s not forget here and as said above, children also travel TO Rogate School from outside the area, the County Council would wish to work with the community to ensure that pre-school provision and other community facilities can be sustained.
Careful consideration will be given to transport, especially of younger children, what happened to the idea of the children walking/cycling or have we now discarded that idea already?
WSCC Statement: The Rogate site is held on a Church educational Trust and any capital receipt from its disposal is likely to be reinvested for statutory educational use within the Diocese. An alternative to closure would be to establish a 4 to 11 primary school, but this is not considered to be a viable option due to the need to reduce school numbers in this area, so we take it from this statement, that the idea of “reducing school numbers” has already been decided, so much for that famous and much overused word by WSCC that of “Consultation”
Page (9) Rake CE First School (Controlled), WSCC Statement: Age of Transfer at 11 would mean that parents living on the county border would have a choice of school at the end of Year 6 and the County Council believes that this would encourage more parents to keep their children at Rake CE First School NOT JUST RAKE WHAT ABOUT ROGATE who are both very close to, and lose children to the Hampshire 2 tier system. IF AS AGREED WE GO FOR A 2 TIER SYSTEM IN WEST SUSSEX, THEN LOTS OF CHILDREN AND PARENTS WHO CURRENTLY ARE OPTING OUT WILL OPT FOR THE MUCH BETTER, SMALLER, COMMUNITY VILLAGE SCHOOLS THAT WSCC ARE TRYING TO CLOSE. TALK ABOUT SHOOTING ONES SELF IN ONES OWN FOOT !
WSCC Statement: The school (RAKE) is currently operating at about half of its capacity and closure has been considered as an option as an alternative to Rogate. Rake CE First School is well located for transport access and would not initially need any additional classrooms to accommodate another year group? A recent planning application which incidentally was well supported by Rogate Parish Council, whose area of responsibility covers Rake as well, was turned down as it was considered un-sustainable due to poor access with no public transport.
WSCC Statement: We are not proposing closure of the site, as we believe that this is the most accessible and largest site to meet any future need. Rake School land is full to capacity now, so how do WSCC propose to add additional classrooms, demolish the school and start again?
Whereas Rogate has massive amounts of spare land and can easily accommodate the New Year 6 Classrooms that will be needed, but we still ask the question, why close any of these schools?
And so this “DISCUSSION DOCUMENT” goes on and on, let us not be steamrollered or hoodwinked into submission here, for this document is not a balanced argument being put forward here.
WHAT IT IS HOWEVER, in my own personal view, it is a very contrived proposal, which is full of cleverly manipulated figures and derogatory and carefully devised statements, all designed to present the views of WSCC and Mark Dunn WSCC Cabinet Member for Children & Young People’s Services, as being the best route to follow,
We the community, must have just one word to say for it: “RUBBISH”
From the now smoking, keyboard of the www.rogat-rake.org Web-Editor, whose personal views these are & of no other persons or collective. |
