Consultation meeting with Knights Enham Infant School and Knights Enham Junior School joint staff and governors

Date: 08 March 2006

Time: 4.00 - 6.00 pm

Venue: Knights Enham Junior School

The meeting was attended by:

Mrs Sandra Hunter - Headteacher, Knights Enham Infant School;

Mrs Anne Hughes - Headteacher, Knights Enham Junior School;

Peter Colenutt - Assistant Education Officer (School Review);

Alex Munro - Education Officer (Admissions & Special Projects);

56 members of staff and governors.

Issues raised:

· It would be a better use of public money if only one school was built at East Anton with the surplus places at the other schools being filled.

· How was it possible to assess future numbers at East Anton until the housing profile was known?

· If a decision is taken, when will the public notices be published?

· Will a railway station be built at East Anton?

· If a school is to close, how will parents get their children to the new school at East Anton?

· Safety concerns were expressed about walking across the footbridge and dual carriageway.

· Knights Enham is an area of high deprivation. The school is the only community facility in the area apart from the pub. What will be re-provided if the school is to close?

· The playing field at Knights Enham School is the only "open space" in the area. Children are safe on the school site and make excellent use of the facilities at holiday clubs.

· Has consideration been given to establishing a 3 - 18 school at the new development for primary and secondary aged pupils?

· Why does it have to be Knights Enham children that lose their facility? Why not make East Anton children come to the surplus places?

· There is a deficit of 65 pre-school places - why are we proposing to close the nursery, which is an integral part of the Knights Enham school?

· Why was a new school not provided for Saxonfields?

· The Children Act has the themes - "be healthy" and "stay safe". If this review is to try to achieve these aims, how can it be that children are being asked to cross a busy road?

· The Balksbury schools have recently had new classes - why has the County Council invested in that community and not ours?

· The new development at East Anton should be seen as part of the existing community and not as a stand-alone community.

· The disruption in pupil's education could have an impact on their SATS results. Will children be given the opportunity to re-take?

· If the SATS results are low, this will have an impact on the perception of this school.

· Why should the parents of East Anton have a local school and not us?

· Will there be support for parents as well as staff if a decision is taken to close a school?

· Why is the County Council looking at closing the Knights Enham schools? The nursery is oversubscribed, the school has excellent standards and highly skilled staff.

· This review has had a real impact on the children. Are we going to meet and hear their views?

· Why are the options so limited?

· The decision-makers must visit the schools and talk to the children to understand how the schools work.

· Can the money proposed for East Anton's new school not be re-invested into the existing school provision?

· Knights Enham School has a high number of SEN children who find it particularly difficult to adapt to change.

· Has land been set aside for a secondary school site in the new development?

· How does closing one of the Knights Enham or Shepherds Spring schools fit in with the green transport policy?

· Has any consideration been given to road safety and the inevitable increase of car travel if schools are closed?

· The Knights Enham schools have good core structures. Will the proposed new schools have such structures?

· The governors have been impressed by the local community's feelings about how important they consider the Knights Enham schools to be.

· It takes 30 years to build a community - that's just happened, don't take it away.

· The County Council seems to be asking local people to decide the future rather than taking responsibility itself.

· It is important that councillors and other members of the Children's Services Policy Review Committee visit all schools and spend time talking to staff and children.

Consultation meeting with Shepherds Spring Infant School and Shepherds Spring Junior School joint staff and governors

Date: 06 March 2006

Time: 4.00 - 6.00 pm

Venue: Shepherds Spring Junior School

The meeting was attended by:

Mrs Trisha Cook - Headteacher, Shepherds Spring Infant School;

Ms Joyce Johnson - Headteacher, Shepherds Spring Junior School;

Peter Colenutt - Assistant Education Officer (School Review);

Alex Munro - Education Officer (Admissions & Special Projects);

36 members of staff and governors.

Issues raised:

· The issue of surplus places is accepted. Would it not be more sensible to build one new school to serve the East Anton development, with the rest of the children filling surplus places in the existing schools?

· Has a decision been taken as to where the proposed Children's Centres will be located and are they part of this review?

· If only one school is built at East Anton, there will not be any surplus places in existing schools.

· How can the local authority be certain of the number of children that will be generated from the new development?

· New schools are proposed for the East Anton community - what about us?

· How can you be confident about the forecast figures? Andover is unique.

· A large sum of money has been spent refurbishing Shepherds Spring Junior School - how can closure now be proposed?

· The forecast numbers to 2010 take into account children yet to be born!

· A graph was handed out by the headteacher of Shepherds Spring Infant School illustrating the fluctuation in their numbers.

· The proposal of closure has had an impact on the current school numbers.

· Councillor Kirk has a vested interest in seeing new schools at East Anton as the local Member of Test Valley Borough Council.

· Does Councillor Kirk make the final decision on the future of school provision, as has been reported in the local press?

· Why are certain schools in Andover allowed to take over their published admission numbers?

· Why have schools on the other side of Andover town been expanded?

· Has the option of amalgamation of the two schools been considered?

· The planned meeting for 22 March with Councillor Kirk does not allow enough time.

· Excellent work is undertaken by both schools.

· It would be helpful if Councillor Kirk had visited the schools prior to his decision day on 19 January.

· When will the report for the July committee become public?

· Should the decision be taken to close a school, what will happen to the children who do not want to attend the other school proposed?

· If a school were to close, would the closure be phased and how would children be allocated to other school?

· The view was expressed that the education of children at Shepherds Spring is far better than elsewhere.

· Could the Cabinet decision day of 24 July be changed, bearing in mind that it was the last day of the summer term?

· It was pointed out that Shepherds Spring, Knights Enham and Roman Way serve distinct communities. If a school is closed this will be a major loss to that individual community.

· The County Council's Aim 4 of the Corporate Strategy (building strong and safe communities) would not be achieved by these proposals

· Can one of the schools proposed for closure not be relocated to the new development?

· Concerns were expressed about the safety of the footbridge that is considered dangerous, particularly in the wet.

· If children are transferred to Knights Enham, there will be major issues in respect of parent parking outside the school.

· The Andover estates are split with disturbances between the communities. Shepherds Spring children will not go to Knights Enham.

· Some families will not be able to travel to Knights Enham.

· The children being generated from East Anton should be part of the Shepherds Spring community.

· A number of young couples are leaving parenthood late - what will happen if they all have children - numbers will increase.

· The headteachers of all four schools have expressed concern that, if schools were amalgamated, the tensions between the two communities would be replicated in the playground.

· Small class sizes are promised by the government - that's what we have. Why change it?

· It would appear that there is an underlying long term plan and local communities are not being told the full picture. Decisions will be based on economics, rather than people.

· The new housing at East Anton may draw people from established areas within Andover.

· The consultation should involve the wider community.

· The availability of funds from the developers should not determine the policy for new schools.

· One school at East Anton was acceptable but any remaining money should be used for the wider community.

· All staff at the school were special and had skills which could not be easily replaced.

Consultation meeting with Smannell and Enham governors

Date: 22 February 2006

Time: 7.15 pm

Venue: Smannell and Enham Primary School

The meeting was attended by:

Peter Colenutt - Assistant Education Officer (School Review)

Alex Munro - Education Officer (Admissions & Special Projects)

Six governors

Apologies were received from Kevin Lynch - Headteacher

Issues raised:

· Will the Andover review consider the issues being raised by the Turnaround Project?

· Governors sought the addresses of CSPRC and Cabinet members.

· A governor's discussions with Test Valley Borough Council about planning figures for the East Anton development advise that 750 dwellings would be for social housing, 250 key worker and 1,500 private.

· A school's reputation will have an impact on its number on roll.

· Is a 420 place primary school too large? It was suggested that 200 places would be best.

· How does the local authority calculate its forecast figures?

· Is the net capacity assessment for the school correct?

· How will the public meeting be chaired and will people be asked for their questions prior to the meeting?

· What will be the potential impact of the new schools at East Anton on Smannell and Enham numbers? High numbers come from out of catchment. New housing could generate additional pupils for Smannell and Enham.

· Will the new school at East Anton be a faith school?

· What will happen to the children from the new development prior to the opening of the new school?

· Will the school catchment area reduce if the new school is built at East Anton?

· Existing school provision should be used in the north east of Andover with the possibility of expanding Smannell and Enham school so that only one new school would be needed to serve the new development.

· Smannell and Enham should not increase in size as this would destroy the ethos of the school.

· The consultation booklet should be made available to Smannell and Enham parents.

Consultation meeting with Roman Way Primary School staff and governors

Date Monday 13 March 2006

Time 18:00 - 19:15

Venue Roman Way Primary school

The meeting was attended by:

Alex Munro - Education Officer (Admissions & Special Projects)

Richard Vaughan - Strategic Planning Officer

16 Governors and staff of Roman Way Primary school

Issues raised:

· What are the plans for any site that becomes free due to a school closure?

· Do the remaining schools benefit financially or in any other way if a school disposal takes place?

· Is there a need for a new secondary school, if not how will secondary provision be managed?

· What is the timescale for the new East Anton school(s)?

· What is the timescale for any school closures?

· What happens to the equipment in a school that is closed?

· What happens to the staff that work in a school that is to be closed?

· Roman Way have been visited by numerous PBRS officers over the recent weeks. What was the purpose of this?

· What experience do Members have that enables to decide on a school closure?

· How firm are the proposals set out in the consultation document, as currently Roman Way is not facing any closure issues?

· How will highways infrastructure in the area affect the final decision?

· Do any criteria exist for the closure of a school?

· What exactly will the Members' decision in July encompass?

· What input do the remaining schools have in any recommended changes to them?

· Concern was expressed about the pressure this review was having on current school staff at all the local schools.

Consultation meeting with Knights Enham Junior School Round Table

Date: 27 March 2006

Time: 9.30 - 10.30 am

Venue: Knights Enham Junior School

The meeting was attended by:

Mrs Anne Hughes - Headteacher, Knights Enham Junior School;

Mr Gareth Hughes - Deputy Headteacher, Knights Enham Junior School;

Mr Peter Colenutt - Assistant Education Officer (School Review);

Mr Alex Munro - Education Officer (Admissions & Special Projects);

12 pupils - members of Knights Enham Junior School Round Table.

Issues raised:

· Why do you want to close any schools?

· Why is our school up for closure?

· Why build so many new houses?

· Why not build something different on the land?

· How are new houses and schools at East Anton going to benefit our community?

· Why not improve this area instead of East Anton?

· What will happen to us if you close Knights Enham Junior School?

· What will happen if people don't settle into their new schools?

· What about our playing fields? What about Testway 7s/school holiday clubs? Where will we go during the holidays?

· What will happen to our equipment if we close? (Timber trail)

· Why not build a secondary school on this side of town?

· What about road safety? Cars speed along Newbury Road.

· What will happen during bad weather if we have a long walk to school?

· The result of our debate was not to close any schools. Why not build a new school when the other schools are full?

Record of drop-in sessions held at St Michael's Church Centre, Smannell Road, Andover

Date: 7 March 2006

Times: 2.00 - 4.30 pm

5.30 - 7.30 pm

These sessions were intended mainly for parents in the Shepherds Spring/Roman Way community although some representatives of the Knights Enham and Vigo schools also attended. Officers spoke to about 48 residents.

The following points were made:

1 The start of the consultation process had already raised tensions between the Knights Enham and Shepherds Spring communities. Banners put up by Shepherds Spring had already been vandalised and it was suggested that this had been done by children from Knights Enham.

2 Why was it intended to build new schools when there were so many surplus places already available?

3 The two communities do not mix. Closing a pair of schools and expecting pupils to attend the other schools would not work.

4 Early years provision was crucial to the area and should not be jeopardised.

5 Similarly, the schools had particular SEN expertise which, again, should not be jeopardised.

6 Pupils are already suffering because of the uncertainty.

7 Shepherds Spring is trying to work together with Knights Enham but there is no evidence that Knights Enham wishes to reciprocate.

8 Neither parents at Shepherds Spring nor Knights Enham would send their children to the school which remained open and would prefer to send them elsewhere.

9 Pupils are already leaving Shepherds Spring because of the uncertainty.

10 The school acts as a good centre for local groups, such as scouts and cubs.

11 If the Shepherds Spring schools were to be closed, would the County Council then build houses on the site?

12 The bridge over the dual carriageway is "lethal". Parents will not use this but will cross the dual carriageway instead. Many children come to school by themselves and would be put at additional risk if they had to cross from one community to the other.

13 Has the County Council given any thought to the extended schools agenda?

Record of drop-in session held at Knights Enham Infant School Community Room, Andover

Date: 8 March 2006

Times: 8.30 - 11.30 pm

These sessions were intended mainly for parents in the Knights Enham community. Officers spoke to about 50 residents.

The following points were made:

14 A parent said that he had moved his child from Shepherds Spring to Knights Enham because of bullying and the new school had tackled the problem immediately.

15 The area was not large compared to a city and it was possible to walk between schools.

16 What would happen to land and buildings if schools closed?

17 Had any thought been given to the provision of a secondary school?

18 Birth rates can fluctuate. Had this been taken into account?

19 It is illogical to build a new school when there are so many surplus places in the area.

20 No school was built at Saxon Fields so why should one be built at East Anton?

21 The nursery provision at the school was exceptional and should not be jeopardised. This point was made by a number of parents.

22 The schools are very much part of the local community.

23 Teachers had particular expertise with SEN.

24 If there was any disruption, pupils' SATS scores would inevitably be affected.

25 Has the County Council considered carefully the cost of providing new schools compared to enhancing existing schools?

26 A parent said that Knights Enham had supported her child with ADHD exceptionally well. Other parents also spoke highly of the SEN provision at the schools.

27 Would changing the catchment areas help to ensure that all schools had sufficient children?

28 The bridge over the dual carriageway was very "scary". There were also dark alleys on the Knights Enham side of the road which would deter parents and children.

29 The County Council should recognise the exceptional change brought about by Knights Enham Junior School's Rights, Respect and Responsibilities agenda. This had received widespread national publicity and the school was an outstanding example of how this programme affected not only individual children's but also families' lives.

30 Many families have no car and therefore can only walk their children to school.

31 The proposals to close one pair of schools had exacerbated relationships between the two communities which were already "nasty".

Public Meeting to discuss the review of primary education in the Andover area

Date: Monday 27 March 2006

Time: 7.00 pm

Venue: Winton School (Specialist School - Technology)

The meeting was attended by:

Councillor David Kirk - Executive Member for Education

Peter Colenutt - Assistant Education Officer (School Review)

Alex Munro - Education Officer (Admissions & Special Projects)

Martin Goff - Assistant Education Officer (Admissions)

149 staff, governors, parents, members of the public and councillors

Cllr Kirk emphasised that the Council would listen carefully to all suggestions and that innovative solutions were not ruled out. The options offered for consultation were a starting point but it was important to recognise that maintaining the status quo was not an option.

Issues raised:

1. Mr Colenutt and Mr Munro made a brief presentation, ending with a summary of the key points which had emerged from the consultations to date, namely:

· Knights Enham and Shepherds Spring are separate communities

· Safety concerns about bridge and road crossings.

· Excellent care and teaching by both sets of schools.

· One school rather than two at East Anton

· Make more use of existing schools

· Importance of pre-school provision.

2. In the question and answer session, the following issues were raised:

· Why is there no mention of village schools, in particular at least one of them has more than 25% surplus places?

· Some parents have removed their children because of the Andover review. Is it fair to allow these losses to impact on the decision?

· Changing school provision in existing communities ruins the community. It is inconsistent to argue for a school to serve a new community and then take away a school that serves a current community.

· We are talking about the population of Andover, If we take away the schools then the young people will be let down and will leave the area.

· If a school is to close when will it happen?

· How will the children be supported if a closure occurs at the time when they do their SATs?

· What support will there be for the teachers if they are going to best support the children?

· The argument is presented as though it is one about numbers but we are talking about two existing communities which have significant social difficulties and the schools have become the focal point. How will you support these communities?

· Where will the support be for a given community if a school is closed?

· The Hampshire rate is largest proportion of council tax. Are we communicating with the rest of Hampshire about why we are spending money closing two schools in order to open two schools?

· Are there spare spaces in secondary schools and, if so, can the Shepherds Spring and Knights Enham spaces be utilized by secondary pupils?

· Does funding from rates pay for pre-school places?

· There is a predicted decrease in numbers in in 2010? How do you know? Have you got crystal balls?

· Do numbers grow and exceed the places in secondary schools?

· It is all about money; can't East Anton children fill spaces in existing schools? You are just trying to get two free new schools and a capital receipt from a closed school site.

· Will any capital receipt be spent in Andover or elsewhere?

· Where will children's centres be built?

· Has any application been put in for change of usage of the Knights Enham Junior School playing field?

· Can you explain why you started your review in North Andover? The Alamein ward regeneration initiative is already going on with the LSP.

· I don't believe a school at East Anton should be achieved by closing other schools. Why can't children in new houses go to Shepherds Spring and fill up surplus places? Saxon Fields development didn't get new school, why not?

· Primary schools should be established at both Shepherds Spring and Knights Enham, with children's centres in each. Currently short of these options in the consultations.

· If one of the schools is closed and the additional provision is created will it be in temporary or permanent buildings? There are too many children across two schools, so how will they be accommodated if one school is closed? What about maximum class sizes?

· Why isn't Roman Way in the equation? Why not consider a change in catchment area instead?

· What is reasonable for a family on a new development? Houses won't sell on new development if there is no school there-that is the real motivation!

· Can pre-school be hived off and treated separately from the decisions on I & J schools?

· If half the houses were at Picket Twenty and half at E Anton, would you still want a new school on the new development? Are we moving the provision to new developments irrespective of the feelings of the existing community?

· HCC already has two existing good quality schools. Does it make any sense to close either of them?

· It is all facts and figures: no talk about children! How will you support children in settling in (to a new school)? Existing rivalry, how will you overcome it?

· Whom will you employ to help children/schools? The potential closure is fuelling rivalry. Major difficulties between the children in the event of closure.

· How do you pay for a new school given the presumption that surplus places need to be removed to free up money? How will you get a big enough school-A families have 2/3 children?

· Section 106 agreements - are they PFI (private finance initiatives)?

· Two existing communities plus a new community-remodel existing facilities to create resources in all communities.

· Proposing closure has lead to 2 schools finding it harder to recruit and they are blighted. HCC is promoting children leaving their local schools and choosing elsewhere.

· Would you be here without E Anton? Would you have targetted just these two schools?

· There has been a special Andover project to support the town with its unique problems. How do these proposals fit in with the purpose of that Andover project?

· Children Act requires you to take everything into account rather than isolate certain schools. Proposal: small schools throughout Andover to help it through its own special issues.

· The communities need bringing together not pulling apart. You started with the proposals which have created anger, you should have talked with the community first.

· Two years ago, the forecast for Knights Enham Junior (CHECK) was 130, there are now 180 on roll. Can you be confident of the forecasts?

· The consultation starts with the most divisive option. Can't you begin with lesser impact options?

· Is there any advice to support parents whose children are worried about the current situation?

· Many people are anxious. It is Hampshire County Council's responsibility to keep people informed.

· We need consistency in figures.

· Reassure us that you work with TVBC and HCC transport.

· It takes 30 years to build a community-don't destroy them.

· TVBC spent 2 million on old balls in the High Street.

· Why have HCC refused to publicise this meeting-it was not publicised to the public!

· A request for an official working party of:

_ Headteachers and parent governors meeting with officers to ensure that a compromise solution is found and to overcome protocols and pressure from Westminster and work together.

_ Councillor Kirk offered to take place of officers

· Ensure that TVBC and HCC councillors have tonight's record. Cllr Kirk agreed that this would be done.

· Headteachers will support parents/children and staff as best they can throughout this process.

· Local county councillors Pat West and Robin Hughes explained why they had to declare an interest in these matters.