CALMORE JUNIOR SCHOOL

CONSULTATION WITH STAFF AND GOVERNORS (2 JULY 2003)

26 staff and governors present at the meeting

Buildings

· A number of staff wanted clarification of the term "resourced provision" in the original report and what provision was required in the area.

· The original report also identified the need to consult with the special schools in the area and governors wished to know if the LEA was seeking to close the three special schools.

· Governors were keen to understand what type of school the new primary school would be, i.e. foundation or community?

· An explanation was sought on a potential problem whereby one of the two schools on the same site wishes to seek an amalgamation and the other does not.

· One governor asked for clarification regarding the possibility of a special school becoming part of the school.

· A supplementary question asked how the resourced provision will be integrated into the school and the effect this will have on the needs of the teachers in terms of training.

· Staff were concerned that if the amalgamation is agreed at what point in the process will a decision be made about the use of the other building on the site?

· Should the amalgamation go ahead it is likely that parents will wish to know to what use the other building will be put. This may have an effect on the number of pupils attending the school as parents may make a choice depending upon to what use the other building will be put. The longer a decision takes to make the more likely it will be that parents will choose other schools in the area. Confirmation was sought on the criteria to be used when discussions are held with the Executive Member (Education), especially in terms of the resourced provision required in the area. A number of schools may be happy to accept the Early Years provision but not some of the other resourced provision so how will decisions be taken on which school will get which provision.

· Governors wished to know what would happen to the school if they said no to option 2 (the utilisation of surplus capacity for Early Years and/or SEN resourced provision) would option 1 (amalgamation of both schools to form a 2FE primary school) be implemented by default? Another concern was based upon the Early Years provision going into one of the schools with the other school having the SEN resourced provision, should option 2 be implemented).

· Confirmation was sought on the proposal that it would either be amalgamation or resourced provision OR amalgamation plus resourced provision.

· It was pointed out that the school is in a good location in terms of public transport and there was some fear that this would drive the thinking of the LEA when considering SEN provision in the area.

· Staff were uneasy about the effect on four year olds accessing the same building as 11 year olds and how daunting it could be for the younger pupils.

· The governors and staff were worried about the effect on the numbers if the EBD resource provision were to be based within the buildings at Calmore.

· Some surprise was expressed by the meeting that the proposed primary school will still leave 90 surplus places (based on projected numbers) which is still high and the meeting wished to be assured that the LEA would not be back again with further consultations.

· Governors were apprehensive about the type of resourced provision that could be placed at Calmore and it was felt that the provision of an LI resource would be easier to "sell" to the parents than an EBD resource. It may also be more difficult for the younger pupils to deal with EBD pupils on site. What would happen if all the schools in the consultation process opted for the LI resourced provision and no school wished to accept the other SEN provision. What would the LEA do if no amalgamation takes place and the school does not wish to accept any other resourced provision? There would still be the issue of surplus places with no way forward.

Pupil Numbers

· A number of staff and governors questioned the validity of the projected numbers for the school and wished to be assured that there would be sufficient places in the area should an amalgamation take place.

· The main reason for the consultation process is the falling rolls in the schools. A point was made that this had been happening for a number of years so was this a new initiative or had there been consultations in the county prior to this one?

· Governors wished to be assured that the projected numbers take into account what is happening in the existing houses and that the LEA does not just look at any new housing developments.

· Concern was expressed that the surplus places in the Calmore area was showing 41% compared with ~30% further down the Waterside. Would the higher percentage in the Calmore area "go against" the school when a final decision is made?

· One governor made the point that the worst case scenario would be to build a 420 places (2FE) primary school and 450 pupils seek to access the school which would require temporary accommodation. This would not be acceptable.

Educational Standards

· Nothing raised under educational standards.

Staffing

· One governor sought clarification about the position of the teachers in the two Calmore Schools should an amalgamation take place and what would happen to the staff in both schools. It was stated that the governors of the junior school would seek to deal with teachers in both schools equitably but asked for clarification on the timescale for the proposals to be implemented so that the staffing structure at any new primary school could be sorted out.

Funding

· Governors were concerned that funding for the whole process has yet to be determined and may well be linked with the sale of different schools identified in the consultation process.

Consensus

· No consensus from the body of the meeting.