Meeting documents
Cabinet
Wednesday, 1st June, 2005
|
THE FUTURE OF NEWBRIDGE ST JOHN CofE VC INFANT SCHOOL AND NEWBRIDGE JUNIOR SCHOOL A CONSULTATION PAPER LOOKING AT THE FUTURE OF THE TWO SCHOOLS, THE POSSIBILITY OF MERGER AND THE CREATION OF A PRIMARY SCHOOL Enquiries to: Bruce Austen School Organisation Manager Education Service Bath & North East Somerset P O Box 25 Riverside KEYNSHAM BS31 1DN Tel: 01225 395169 or e-mail: Bruce_austen@bathnes.gov.uk |
THE FUTURE AT NEWBRIDGE
1. WHY ARE WE PUBLISHING THIS PAPER?
1.1 In September 2003 we began looking at the needs of all our primary schools. Each school is being reviewed alongside its partner schools in a particular area. The aims of each review are:
a) improving educational standards;
b) ensuring that resources (land, buildings, money and people) are used in the most effective way.
c) aiming to provide improved facilities for children, school staff and the wider community.
d) making the choice of the local school the natural and easy choice for parents / carers
1.2 North West Bath was the focus of our review between January and April 2005. Various documents were circulated to Headteachers, school Governors, local Councillors, and senior officers in the Education Service. A panel of Councillors known as the Overview & Scrutiny Panel held a public meeting at the Guildhall on 28th February 2005 where they heard Headteachers, Governors and local Councillors talk about whether changes were needed in the area and what might be of greatest benefit to children in the future.
1.3 The members of the Panel also visited all of the schools so they could see for themselves the facilities that are available to staff and children in this area.
1.4 The Overview & Scrutiny Panel produced a report and this was presented at a public session on 14 March 2005. A crucial recommendation of the Panel's report was that the Council should consult people on the future of the two Newbridge schools. The Governors of both schools agreed that this was a positive move.
1.5 The Panel's recommendation was included in a final paper written by Council officers and attached to a report presented to the Council Executive at the Guildhall on 6 April 2005. The Executive decided to go ahead and consult people on a potential merger between Newbridge St John Church of England Infant and Newbridge Junior schools. This paper is the first stage in the process.
1.6 The Council is not looking for a short-term solution. All those involved in the debate, and particularly the Council, need to be sure that decisions are not simply what suits us now but gives a good basis for a successful future for the coming generations of children in the area.
1.7 The Government also asks that when we think about changes to schools we consider the effect of any proposal on the togetherness or cohesion of a community.
1.8 Before looking at the possible change, readers will want to know that at the last count 468 children attend these two schools. The debate and decision on the proposal for change will have an impact on these children, the staff and the local community and this must kept in the forefront of everyone's thinking.
1.9 Although the suggested size of the school (420 places) is fewer than the current numbers of children on roll we do not envisage children leaving the school other than at the normal time. We would expect the admission number to be set at 60, which is lower than the current admission level at either school, and this will lead to a natural and gradual reduction in numbers over the coming years.
|
Year |
YR |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y3 |
Y4 |
Y5 |
Y6 |
Total |
|
2004 |
72 |
64 |
63 |
81 |
53 |
78 |
60 |
471 |
|
2005 |
68 |
72 |
64 |
66 |
81 |
53 |
78 |
482 |
|
2006 |
60 |
68 |
72 |
64 |
66 |
81 |
53 |
464 |
|
2007 |
60 |
60 |
68 |
72 |
64 |
66 |
81 |
471 |
|
2008 |
60 |
60 |
60 |
68 |
72 |
64 |
66 |
450 |
|
2009 |
60 |
60 |
60 |
60 |
68 |
72 |
64 |
444 |
|
2010 |
60 |
60 |
60 |
60 |
60 |
68 |
72 |
440 |
|
2011 |
60 |
60 |
60 |
60 |
60 |
60 |
68 |
428 |
|
2012 |
60 |
60 |
60 |
60 |
60 |
60 |
60 |
420 |
1.10 We should also point out that regardless of whether the new school is a community school or a Church of England school there will be no change to admissions policy. Voluntary controlled schools have the same admissions policy as community schools.
2. WHAT DO WE THINK?
2.1 The Council is in favour of all-through primary schools. We believe that primary schools provide the greatest chance of ensuring consistency and coherence across the curriculum from the Foundation Stage to the end of Key Stage 2. This was set out in the School Organisation Plan three years ago. This does not mean we think that our infant and junior schools do not provide a good quality of education.
2.2 The Council has no fixed view on the category of school. Our
principal interest is to ensure the maintenance and improvement of existing high educational standards for the children at the schools currently and to see a pattern of education in place which will help support high standards in the future. A further explanation of the meaning of categories of school can be found below.
2.3 The Diocese of Bath & Wells general view is that all-through primary schools are preferable and that, where schools are merging, and one of the schools is a Church of England school, then the new school should also be a Church of England school.
2.4 The Council believes that primary schools should be no larger than 420 places, sometimes referred to as a two form entry school. This has been agreed by the local School Organisation Committee too. However, in certain circumstances where schools are successful, popular and well managed we are willing to consider schools which exceed this size providing we can be sure that educational standards will be maintained and improved.
3. WHAT ARE WE ASKING?
3.1 We are asking whether you believe that Newbridge St John CofE VC
Infant School and Newbridge Junior School should become one school. The aim would be for the new school to offer 420 places and admit sixty children per year.
3.2 We are also asking for views on the timing of any change. We would expect any proposal to take effect from 1 September 2006.
3.3 We are also seeking views on the category of school. The infant school is a Church of England voluntary controlled school. The Junior school is a community school. In practical terms the difference is small as both schools have an obligation to provide Christian collective worship and also religious education as part of the national curriculum. In legal terms there is a significant difference and the school must fall into only one category.
4 WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE STAFF?
4.1 Given that there will be little change in the number of children or classes to be taught in the first few years of the new school there seems to be no reason why any members of staff should lose their jobs. There will, of course, be only one Headteacher and it will also be for the Governors to decide how much administrative and caretaking support is required.
5. WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE BUILDINGS?
5.1 The Council does not believe that, in the short to medium-term, major changes are needed to the buildings although a study will be undertaken during this consultation period to identify any works which might be necessary to meet the needs of a `new' school and make best use of the existing buildings.
6. WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
6.1 The Council Executive will receive a report at their meeting on June 1 2005 telling them the results of the consultation and asking them to decide on the next steps. Councillors are obliged by law to take into account the views they hear. This does not mean they have to agree with those views but they do have to explain their decision if it seems to go against the views put forward during consultation.
6.2 The Council Executive may decide to go no further and propose no change at either school. They could decide to go ahead with publishing the legal notice for the closure of the two schools and the opening of a new school. If the new school is a community school the Council will make the proposal. If the new school is to be a Church of England voluntary controlled school then the Diocese of Bath & Wells will publish the proposal.
6.3 If legal notices are published they will stand for six weeks . During that time anyone can write in with letters of support or objection. The final decision is taken by the School Organisation Committee (SOC) which is independent of the Council. If the SOC do not agree unanimously then the issue is referred to a Government appointed adjudicator.
7. HOW TO RESPOND
7.1 There will be a public meeting in the Junior School Hall on May 10 2005, starting at 7 p.m. This meeting is for parents and the wider community and will discuss both schools. Anyone who is interested can attend these meetings. These meetings will be led by Council officers and there will be someone there to take notes of what is said.
7.2 You can write to us. Please send letters to
Bruce Austen, School Organisation Manager,
Bath & North East Somerset Council, PO BOX 25,
Riverside, Temple Street, Keynsham, BS31 1DN.
You can also use the form at the back of this document or you can send us an e-mail. The address for e-mails is bruce_austen@bathnes.gov.uk
All responses, including notes of the public meeting will be available to Councillors before any further decisions are taken. All responses must be received at our offices by no later than May 16th 2005.
THE FUTURE OF NEWBRIDGE CHURCH OF ENGLAND INFANT SCHOOL AND NEWBRIDGE JUNIOR SCHOOL, THE POSSIBILITY OF MERGER AND CREATING A NEW PRIMARY SCHOOL
RESPONSE FORM
Name
Address
Postcode
Please tick all that apply
I am a parent/carer of a child/children at the Infant school
I am a parent/carer of a child/children at the Junior school
I am a member of staff at the Infant school
I am a member of staff at the Junior school
I am a Governor at the Infant school
I am a Governor at the Junior school
Other (please tell us who you are)
...........................................................................
Do you support the merger of Newbridge Church of England VC Infant School and Newbridge Junior School and the creation of a new all-through primary school from 1 September 2006?
Do you think a merged primary school should be a community school, a Church of England school or do you have no opinion?
If you have other suggestions or comments please use the other side of the page or send us a separate e-mail or letter. ALL RESPONSES WILL BE MADE PUBLIC. Please tell us if you do not want your comments to be made public.
Additional Comments
.............................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................