athertonresidentsassociation : Message: Re: [atherton] Re: ARA Meeting Re Hesketh Fletcher

It appears I can't attach the docs so they can be found on

http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/atherton/

http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/athertonresidentsassociation

Please go to links to find the two doc's under Hesketh Fletcher.

Sorry forgot to attach docs

Date: 25/06/2009 21:11:03

To: atherton@...; athertonresidentsassociation@...

Subject: ARA Meeting Re Hesketh Fletcher

HI All

ARA Meeting Re Hesketh Fletcher,

20 People turned up to discus that very subject.

There is another meeting with Andy Burham Friday 6pm at the cricket club.

(Sorry I am working)

There was a great deal of discussion in fact for 2 hours.(7pm -9pm)

The next meet of the ARA will be 29th July 2009 Tuesday at (Hesketh Manor)

7pm upon we will find a representation to go to

Wigan on the 30th to be present at the meeting in the Town Hall 3pm.

Then at the Public meeting on the 4th August 2009 Tuesday at Jubilee Hall St

Richards Club at 7.30pm we will report all that has taken place.

I would ask as many people to attend this event.

So at least we can report to the people of Atherton.

Out of 22000 we should fill jubilee hall.

I hope that all that is taking place that we will have had our say.

Just for all we had the support of Norman Bradbury & Bob Splaine at the

Meeting on Tuesday night.

Enclosed Two Docs

Building Schools for the Future

Consultation Response

Question 1: Should we use BSF to transform schools in the way described?

Yes, we should use BSF funds to transform our schools and few could quarrel

With the aims as set out in the consultation document. Unfortunately the

Plans do not match the aspirations. The aims have not been used as a

Yardstick to test the detail of the plans. The cost of the transformation

In terms of the disruption to the education of pupils, the impact on the

Communities affected and the environment of the borough (particularly in

Terms of travel and transport congestion) is way too high.

For example, Atherton has had a secondary school at the “heart of its

community’” for a hundred years or so. This has meant that the majority of

The population has shared a common experience. Is there a better way to

Ensure ‘community cohesion’? Dispersing that majority to schools outside

The township will be detrimental to a tight knit community. Over the last

Thirty years the adults have dispersed to find work elsewhere, following the

Decline of the major industries in the town. If the High School is closed

And a centre is established that serves children from across the whole of

The east of the borough, what will be left to hold the community together?

Atherton will become just another dormitory town lacking the heart that is

Currently its strength.

Through the consultation it is necessary to heed the concerns of the people

Of the town who have demonstrated their opposition to the plans in a public

Protest.

Question 2: Does our vision describe what we want to achieve?

Yes in terms of today’s preoccupations. It cannot, however be described as

‘visionary’. It pays scant attention to what education in thirty years will

Look like. For example, do those in charge of education in the future

Really think that “the latest technology – for example interactive white

Boards and computers” ( p.2), already widely used in most schools, describes

In any way the technology likely to be in use even ten years from now? The

Vision is demonstrably limited in relation to technology and is equally

Limited in considering what is likely to be required of education in the

Future.

Similarly, there is some mention of the need to limit travel in the

Interests of the environment, yet this concern is ignored in the plans for

Children in Atherton.

Would it not be preferable to invest in what already serves the communities,

Replacing or upgrading the buildings rather than destroying schools that

Serve their communities?

Question 3: Should schools work together to turn our vision into reality?

Yes but if schools are to work together why is one school Fred Longworth

High School missed out of the Phase 1 plans and any developments for that

School deferred to phase 2? Surely all schools affected by planned changes

In an area need to move together, especially since Fred Longworth is the

Closest school to Hesketh Fletcher, the school that the plan proposes should

Be closed? Failure to include plans for Fred Longworth has limited the

Choice for existing pupils at Hesketh Fletcher and assumed that an 11-16

School of 1500 in Tyldesley is a good thing.

Question 4: Have we considered all the issues that you feel need to be

Addressed as part of the re-organization? If not please explain what you

think we have missed out.

Many of the issues have been identified but have not been fully addressed in

the plans. It would appear that the plans have not been scrutinized

sufficiently to show up the inconsistencies that are present in the detail

of the proposals. They seem to smack more of expediency than planning.

Clearly there is a limit to available funding, but these plans do not

describe the future convincingly, do not make best use of what is currently

available and sell the community of some 28,000 people in Atherton short.

The cost to the community of Atherton through the loss of its High School is

too great.

One very important issue not addressed is the optimum size for 11-16 schools

When Fred Longworth had 1350 on role it was more difficult to manage. I500

is too many. Three schools, each of about a thousand, would be much better

than the current proposal. Examination of the school numbers, in relation to

plans for the west of the borough, suggests that schools of around 750 are

acceptable. If that is the case in the west then why is this not true for

the east?

Question 6: Do you agree that local children should have priority for a

place at a local school?

For secondary school pupils of Atherton township this question is a vexed

one, since they will not have a “local secondary school” but will be on the

periphery of the all the others. If, for example, they are given preference

for places at Fred Longworth, as the nearest school, what will then happen

to children in Mosley Common? This has been a difficult issue for many years

and the plans do not address it.

There does not appear to be much room for an increase in numbers in the area

Considering the amount of building in and around Atherton and the need to

add classrooms to some local primaries, this would seem to be an important

consideration.

Question 7: Do you think admission arrangements would be easier to

understand if each denominational school had a defined catchment area?

This is not the biggest problem that the plans for the future need to

consider particularly in the Atherton area. The plans will result in the

closure of the only CE secondary school in the east of the borough.

Question 8: What are your views on our proposal to establish two 14-19

Centres to deliver Diplomas and post-16 courses?

There are two surprising features of these proposals. The first is the

absence of any reference to the local colleges. What will their role be in

the education of 14-16 year olds in the east of the borough? This is not at

all clear. The professional experience of teaching this age group and

delivering vocational courses lies in the tertiary sector but the colleges

do not seem to figure in these plans.

There has been considerable investment in Leigh’s new 6th form centre but

this is not considered.

The second surprising feature is the way the plans seem to ignore the “home

grown” developments of skill centres that stemmed from the need to address

the lack of appropriate vocational education for some young people. These

centres, deliberately located in industrial premises, have been largely

ignored. Would it not have been better to learn from the experiences of

setting up these centres and successfully seeking employer support? It is

interesting that the idea of a company limited by guarantee to run the

proposed centres has been borrowed from these developments while in other

respects they have been ignored.

Currently there is so little flesh on the bones of the proposals for the

skills centres that it is difficult to have much opinion of this part of the

plan. The problem is that in order to establish the centres two schools

have to be closed –and for a pipe dream?

Question 9: What do you think about the idea of the two area based trusts?

At the time of writing this idea seems to have been abandoned for lack of

support.

Question 10: What are your views on community schools becoming foundation

School?

As for Question 9., this idea too seems to have found little support. Any

school with inherent problems in their building, such as acres of flat roofs

would be mad to support this notion.

Of course, if all schools became foundation schools, it would play havoc

with the LA’s admissions procedures.

Question 11: Overall do you think our proposals will help to develop

secondary education to meet the needs and challenges of the 21st Century?

NO. For all the reasons detailed in the answers to the questions above

these plans fail to convince, in spite of the glossy publication. They are

expedient rather than visionary. They fail to meet the needs and challenges

of the future and if implemented will be very costly for the communities

that the borough is supposed to serve. Considering the strong public

opposition to the proposals pushing through this plan could be politically

disastrous, particularly at a time when the government is urging politicians

to connect with the people.

Yahoo! Groups Tips

Did you know...

Messages