Why does the council want to divide the Island so?

Having a child in the Ryde area - Greenmount and St Mary’s will be fighting for the chance to remain open. Both are excellent schools with high ofsted reports, waiting lists to get into the school and now both have committed teachers and staff. My child started St Mary’s last September and is having the time of his life there. I’ve been on the marches and marched with Greenmount parents, made friendships and now this………..

Will either school be saved? One or the other? How can we choose?

Delegated decision report: Approval of Christ the King College
2.2 “The new school will open for September 1 2008, initially with a 9 to 13 age range, although the long term intention of the Dioceses will be to expand the age range to include post 16 provision.”

Appendix A1: Complete proposals
Implementation
Stage 1
31 August 2008 Archbishop King and Trinity middle schools will be discontinued.
1 September 2008 - the new proposed joint Catholic and Church of England school will open for pupils from year 5 to year 8 (pupils aged 9 to 13 years) providing 744 places.
Stage 2
1 September 2009 - the joint school will admit pupils from year 5 to year 9 (pupils aged 9 to 14 years). It will admit 200 pupils into year 5 and by 2013 provide 1000 places.

Project costs
25.
… “it is expected that the new school will be located on the existing sites of Archbishop King and Trinity middle schools in September 2008. The Isle of Wight Council is currently undertaking a review of its own provision across the Island in all 3 phases. Supported fully by the Council, it is likely a further and separate consultation will be undertaken on proposals to expand the proposed new Church school to age 16+/18+. Both dioceses and both governing bodies are working closely with the Council and an opportunity may arise where a single site suitable for the new Church school and its possible expansion to 16+/18+ might be made available.”

And why the concern that this actually means Carisbrooke? Because that’s what it says in the current consultation documents, Which Way Forward. Under the list of schools, it says “Carisbrooke High School: This site will become Christ the King (faith) College in all options.”

There is absolutely no mention in the Which Way Forward document of the pending decision on the ABK/Trinity merger (which Cllr Wells has now made under delegated powers - Monday 10 March).

Anyone naive enough to think that the ABK/Trinity merger doesn’t have implications for Carisbrooke, just think about which middle schools mainly feed Carisbrooke High: West Wight, Nodehill, ABK, Trinity. And it has implications for other high schools, too, because a faith school can (and almost certainly will) have faith selection criteria.

Yes, further consultation has to be done in the coming months before Christ the King expands its age range. And of course more consultation has to be done at Carisbrooke and all the other high schools, too. Which is why people need to be aware of this NOW.

The links to council documents I’ve quoted from are here:

Delegated decision: Approval of Christ the King College
http://www.iwight.com/council/what_is_a_council/Delegated_Powers/Delegated_Decisions_taken/default.asp

Consultation booklet: Which Way Forward
http://www.eduwight.iow.gov.uk/schools/reorganisation/Which%5FWay%5FForward%5F%2D%5FWhy%5FWhen%5Fand%5FHow/consulta.asp

There’s been no such decision.

I am against a faith high school, as are many people, because of the loss of diversity within schools.

The decision only related to the middle school merger of ABK & Trinity.

Even Geoff Lumley did not stick around to question it last evening at the cabinet meeting, when there was the chance for members to do so.

Wider awareness during the summer would be a good thing.

- WILL NOT still close primary/rural schools on mass.

- WILL NOT still create super size high schools.

If you can declare this then you must be able to see the future.
It may be right that this is a great opportunity to improve the standard of island education. If that is, it does not include the decimation of our schools and rural communities and the Council takes consideration of parents’ wishes.

Option 5 was voted for as just an “idea”, NOT as a plan. So they are still free to do much as they please with Island education without accountability.

There is also the issue of the high schools, as Miranda on another blog says;

“And that is that there has been no mention of the plans for high school education.”

Lets not forgot the high schools in this undemocratic process that is being forced upon us and the serious issue of the closure of Carisbrooke High to accommodate a Faith College. A decision that was taken by one lone councillor behind closed doors under, I hear, questionable process.

Democratic ????

We have to place our trust in the people we elect, but, with this council they have destroyed that trust.

They claim to have a policy of transparency..they are correct. Every move they make is ’see through’.

It’s schools today and tourism tomorrow. There has to be an agenda here because nobody would be a stupid as to give away the governance of the Island the way this lot are aiming to at the next election. With the LibDems not yet forgiven, no Labour candidates and the quislings that are the Tories, who will be left to vote for (I wonder!!!)?

Now that the government doesn’t have Scotland to act as its testing ground..maybe the Island is next

I too have always believed that the option 5 outcome is what the Council had in mind right from the beginning and used everything else as a smokescreen. If they had been honest at the beginning, they may have discovered they would have had a much easier ride, as I am sure that most people realise that improving childrens’ education is a top priority and in order to do that, change of some sort has to be effected.

However, I don’t believe this Council has ever heard of damage limitation and instead they have caused the most amount of damage possible. Worried parents and children unsure of what is happening to their school and way of life but worse by far is the strain that has been put on the staff of all schools. None of whom feel secure in their jobs and many seeking new employment to try and safeguard their futures.
As another writer said before: ‘children are very resiliant’ and as long as we as parents smooth the path for them they will cope with whatever changes comes along, but if we have no decent teachers left because they have all jumped ship or not enough teachers, then however much we try to smooth the path for our children, they will suffer.

I have written to the Council members asking a question that has never been answered. They have steadfastly ignored my letters. And that is that there has been no mention of the plans for high school education. This to my understanding has been the whole reason for change according to the council and yet they will not say what their plans are. They want to improve the results, yet seem intent on making them worse by having even larger high schools. My belief is that small is beautiful and research around the world has shown that around 400 pupils in a high school gets the best results. I have never understood why they feel the need to tamper with the primaries which have such good results and yet do nothing to the high schools.