Gillas Lane Primary School

8/14/2019 Gillas Lane Primary School

1/24


2/24

Gillas Lane Parents / MembersMeeting 15.6.2009

Gillas Lane Parents We know that the status quo is not

viable

We know the situation has to change We are prepared to work with thecouncil

But..


3/24


Would you want your child to go to a schoolwith lower standards, larger classes,cramped classrooms, (maybe even

portacabins), unfamiliar teachers, which isless convenient and practical and not yourfirst choice?

Would you want this for your child?


4/24


Parental Choice Where is our parental choice with

Option 1?

Ed Balls / Government expandparental choice

Sunderland City Council reducing it


5/24


The School

Gillas Lane a good, small, family-orientedschool Good standard of Education Good Ofsted report Good at dealing with Special Needs

Supported by the community Dedicated teachers Pupils like it, parents like it Surplus places can be managed without

closure


6/24


So why is there a need to close asuccessful, well-regarded school witha good reputation in the localcommunity?


7/24


Objections to Option 1 Least acceptable option for pupils, parents andcommunity

Major Transition problems Only council see this as acceptable No guarantee of improved education level Where are the educational benefits for Gillas

Lane pupils? Newer buildings = Better Education? Worst possible option for pupils


8/24


Support for Option 3 Viable Option it solves surplus places problem.

Parents want it

Pupils want it

Both schools want it The Gillas Lane community wants it

Why does the council not want to work with thelocal community?


9/24


Why not Option 2? Better than option 1 for pupils

New start, new school identity

Fairer for pupils

Easier transition for Gillas Lane pupils Lesser of two evils?

Fairer to teachers

Why was Option 2 discarded with no

explanation?


10/24


Complaints Parents extremely frustrated with

the school place planning process Complained using the proper channels

Denied by Sunderland City Council Current Local Government

Ombudsman investigation of 5complaints


11/24


Complaints (cont.) Consultation process

Design flawed Only one method

No flexibility on timing of meetings No focus groups

No plan to involve children sensitively

No plan for the Difficult / Hard to reach

Response forms Not designed for acknowledgement


12/24


Complaints (cont.) Consultation Process (cont.)

Not following Council policies andstrategies:

Community Consultation Social Cohesion

Corporate Equality Scheme

Community Empowerment Action Plan

Every Child Matters


13/24


Complaints (cont.) Option Appraisals Errors / Mistakes Nursery and Changeover timing!! Assessment criteria lacked education factors Too much concentration on building factors

No detailed financial assessments of options House Building / Demographics uncertain future Cursory exploration of suggested alternatives Why have educational standards not been taken into

account? Why were there no detailed financial assessments to

compare options?


14/24


Complaints (cont.) Decision making

Opaque!

Inconsistent Seaburn Dene and Grange Park?!

Unfair Why have parents wishes not been acted upon?

Why is Gillas Lane not treated like Grange Parkat the very least?


15/24


16/24


Complaints (cont.) Statutory Guidance non compliance

Issues that must be taken into account: Educational standards

Parents wishes Social factors / Impact on the community

Not done so far by Sunderland City Council!

Why is Sunderland City Council not complyingwith statutory guidance?


17/24


Excerpts from Statutory

Guidance 4.19 The Government wishes to

encourage changes to local schoolprovision which will boost standardsand opportunities for young people,while matching school place supply asclosely as possible to pupils andparents needs and wishes.


18/24


Excerpts from Statutory

Guidance Surplus Places 4.34 It is important that education is provided as cost-

effectively as possible. Empty places can represent a pooruse of resources - resources that can often be used moreeffectively to support schools in raising standards. TheSecretary of State wishes to encourage LAs to organiseprovision in order to ensure that places are locatedwhere parents want them. LAs should take action toremove empty places at schools that are unpopular withparents and which do little to raise standards or improvechoice. The removal of surplus places should alwayssupport the core agenda of raising standards and respectparents' wishes by seeking to match school places with

parental choices.


19/24


20/24


What we would like to

see happen! As a minimum, Gillas Lane should betreated like Grange Park

Reduce the PAN and remodel school

Engage the parents and carers infuture planning

Monitor over the next 3-5 years

Review in 3 years time minimum


21/24


Next Steps This is not a substitute for an oral representationat the SOC meeting we still request one.

We hope that you read the Decision MakersGuidance on school closures thoroughly before

making a final decision We will be discussing the issues with our legal

advisors this week Suggestion - Why not delay the decision until the

Local Government Ombudsman has reported back

on the 5 complaints?


22/24


Questions What are the educational benefits

for Gillas Lane pupils?

Why does the council not want towork with the local community?

Why was Option 2 discarded with noexplanation?


23/24


Questions (cont.) Why have educational standards notbeen taken into account?

Why were there no detailed financial

assessments to compare options? Why have parents wishes not been

acted upon?


24/24


Questions (cont.) Why is Gillas Lane not treated like

Grange Park at the very least?

Why is Sunderland City Council notcomplying with statutory guidance?

Why should Gillas Lane pay for theproblems of others? Is this fair?

Documents

Gillas Lane Primary School