OnTheWight always welcomes a Letter to the Editor to share with our readers – unsurprisingly they don’t always reflect the views of this publication. If you have something you’d like to share, get in touch and of course, your considered comments are welcome below.
This from Louise Baird (from IOW Education Matters).
The school place planning consultation closes at 5pm on Friday 1st November 2024. You can submit your response via the council’s website. Ed
Dear Isle of Wight council,
Before the closure of the consultation tomorrow, the last few days have uncovered some alarming findings regarding the decision-making process for selecting schools proposed for closure. These findings raise questions that we believe parents and the community deserve answers to, in order to respond fully to the consultation by tomorrow.
Would Ashley Whittaker, Naomi Carter, or Councillor Jonathan Bacon be able to address the questions below related to the cabinet report and surplus place planning document?
Point 1
The cabinet report on school place planning stated in Point 25:
“Given the level of surplus places that exist there is an expectation that DfE will be proactive partner to the Council in ensuring a suitable and sufficient pattern of schooling going forward and recognise that the strategy must be ‘school type’ neutral so if academies need to reduce or are proposed for closure, they will engage with the Council to achieve this.”
Furthermore, The Isle of Wight’s Frequently Asked Questions on school closures states:
“Have all schools including Academies be included in the review?
The review of school places is predominantly focused on Primary Schools and not Secondaries. However, yes all primary schools have been included. It is the Council’s role to plan, commission and organise school places in conjunction with the Regional DfE Director in a way that promotes the raising of standards, manages supply and creates a diverse infrastructure. However, it should be noted that the Isle of Wight Council do not have the legal ability to close Academies.”
Question 1
It appears academies were not considered. Northwood Primary Academy was not even approached to see if it would engage with the process; the Local Authority did not attempt to include academies in the schools proposed for closure during the consultation (see the letter from Northwood Primary School Academy Trust to OnTheWight on 23rd September). Why was this?
Point 2
Section 26 of the cabinet report states:
“The set of ranked criteria created from parent voice surveys will enable the local authority to be clear on the criteria which it will use to assess and identify proposals.”
Question 2
The response to a Freedom of Information request (see quote below), which asked the local authority how this was applied and the methodology used to “assess” which schools to close, shows that this was not done. Why?
“We don’t hold recorded information that relates to this, the decision was made through discussions with relevant officers and professional to determine the most suitable provision on the ongoing schooling for children.”
Question 3
Why has the school place planning document used an inconsistently applied red-amber-green system, which creates a misleading visual representation of how schools are performing (see rows 3 and 4 for how two schools performed in their phonics tests in 2023 and 2024)?
Point 5
The cabinet report on school place planning stated in Point 56:
“The council should take into account the overall quality of alternative places in the local area and the popularity of other local schools.”
Question 5
Why have some parents of schools identified for closure been given alternative schools that do not currently perform as well, according to the latest Ofsted reports, when considering the five areas of judgment?
Point 6
The cabinet report on school place planning stated in Point 61:
“It is a statutory requirement to consult any parties the proposer thinks appropriate before publishing proposals under section 15 Education and Inspections Act 2006 to close a maintained school.”
Question 6
Given that 50% of the schools proposed for closure are part of the Portsmouth Diocese, and that in all meetings regarding school closures, the Local Authority has claimed to have consulted all stakeholders. Why has the Portsmouth Diocese not been consulted at all before the publication? (See the response of the Portsmouth Diocese published in OnThe Wight on 30th October.)
Q 6.5
Why did the LA not think it was appropriate to consult the diocese?
Question 7
Finally, why is there an over-representation of Church of England schools among the proposed closures? Could this not be considered discriminatory?
Note from the Editor: OnTheWight has put the questions to the council and will update with a response once we receive it.
In the meantime, in relation to the 23rd September Letter from Northwood Primary School Academy Trust, Jonathan Bacon previously responded by saying that, “the Isle of Wight council had related discussions with Northwood Primary School and the Diocese of Chichester Academy Trust”.
In response to the questions about criteria assessments published on 27th October, the council responded a couple of days later, saying, “the criteria applied was not a one size fits all approach, due to the unique Island structure”.
