Archived decisions
Appendix 3d
Meeting on the proposed closure of Chineham Park Primary School
Interim Executive Board
At Everest Community College on 16 November 2009
Present: Mike Hiscock, Chairman
Nicky Parker
Michele Amos
Judy Heller
Sarah Kiel
Janet Ball
Andrew McCormick
Chris Holt HCC
Martin Shefferd HCC
The HCC officers delivered a brief presentation on the purpose of the meeting, the processes and the timescales.
The following questions were asked:
1. How much support has been given to the school?
2. When was the press release about the consultation issued?
3. There are currently eight planned housing developments going on in Popley, have they all been added into the forecasts for each of the schools?
4. There is a big housing development at Park Prewett, are you proposing to build a new school?
5. Your forecasts look at all schools within a one mile radius but some of the schools are either across the A33 or A339. If we take the schools across those roads out of the equation the number of surplus places reduces dramatically. Could you work on this figure instead?
6. Could an Executive Head be put into the school to try and move things forward more quickly?
7. The consultation on the closure of the school is having an impact on the progress of the pupils. Is it possible for the Local Authority to help with raising standards prior to the SATs tests?
8. Chineham Park Primary School provide a breakfast club and after school which is invaluable to parents, what could parents expect in other schools if the school closes?
9. Has there been any consideration given to amalgamating one pair of infant and junior schools, which have surplus places, to become a smaller primary school thus helping to reduce the surplus places in that area of Basingstoke?
10. How would the children cope in other schools if, as we are led to believe, the children require smaller class sizes?
11. St Bede RCA Primary School wish to move to a 2FE primary school (from a 1FE). If Chineham Park Primary School closes would the Diocese be interested in the school site to allow the expansion of St Bede RCA Primary School?
12. Is there any scope for the IEB to meet David Hardcastle?
13. Is there any scope in the process for private submissions to Councillor Kirk?
The following comments were also made:
1. The IEB has been working to make improvements in the correct areas, consulting on the proposal to close has made this more difficult. If changes cannot be implemented the school will continue to fail the children.
2. The appointment of an IEB for the school has, potentially, raised false hopes amongst both the parents and staff if the school closes and the IEB has not been given time to make a difference.
3. The IEB asked for a copy of the full Local Authority action plan not just the "cut and paste" section shown in the October report.
4. Many parents do not understand that although the school is making satisfactory progress to get out of special measures with the amount of help the school has received from the Local Authority since going into special measures the school should be flying...and it isn't!
5. One issue for the whole of Basingstoke is that some areas have common problems. By clustering schools staff will be able to share experiences.
6. One member of the IEB stated that they would hate to see the site not being used as a school, especially with the outside space available to the pupils, some of which do not have gardens at home.
7. We would not wish to see the site sold for redevelopment. It would make sense to leave the building in place because in 2013/14 it is likely that more school places in the area would be required. The continuation of the SEN hub as part of the pre-school provision will also be vital.
8. To save the school the IEB needs to get pupils going into the school and this will be difficult with the threat of closure hanging over the school. In the same way it will be difficult to change the perception of the school in the community if no additional time is given.
9. We understand that significant changes need to happen in the school (not just leadership issues but others need to be helped to change their teaching practices) but in order to achieve those changes we need time. Unless these changes are made it will be very difficult for the IEB to hand back the governance of the school to a governing body.
10. The danger in this process is that, should the school close, we are suggesting to parents that we know what is best for their children. However, there is a need to provide the children with the appropriate education to enable them to access the next phase of education in the secondary sector and the IEB needs to ensure that happens.
11. There is inappropriate tracking in place to show the pupils are making progress and there needs to be intervention with rigour whatever happens. Should the school close other schools will need to be prepared and ready to accept the children.
12. It appears that even the pupils without SEN are not making the progress they should which, in part, is down to the behavioural issues they are being subjected to on a daily basis. With good quality teaching the pupils with the behavioural problems could be accommodated in other schools.
13. There still needs to be engagement with the staff and pupils about behaviour in the school.
14. We need to be sure in terms of leadership and direction of the school before we could consider backing the school. At present this would not be possible. Unless this can be sorted out it appears that closure is the option but we need to make sure all other options have been exhausted before making that decision.
15. The favoured options would be federation or the change of the school to BESD.
16. HMI is due back within 20 days. Even if we receive a lukewarm response the school is still in trouble.
17. Small class sizes are having a detrimental effect on children's learning as poor behaviour, by what would normally be a small minority of children, is having a greater adverse impact.