Folkestone Academy (FA) expanded to a temporary PAN of 300 places for September 2017, as requested by KCC to cater for additional pupils arising from the closure of Pent Valley. This is described pejoratively in a Consultation Document as: ’the inflated 300 places per year that were assumed’. In the event 303 places were offered, so the expansion was neither inflated nor wrongly assumed, although in the end just 267 arrived, some having taken up places at Dover schools rather than attend their local school; hardly the vote of confidence promulgated by Dr Saxton including her quote about one boy returning, in the correspondence below!

I understand that all but one of the 11 members of the Senior Leadership Team in post when Turner Schools took over have or are departing (the one  remaining is to go on maternity leave!). I have also been fairly reliably informed that at last count, there were 23 staff known to be leaving this month. Not surprisingly, this has enabled the Trust to write to parents informing them that there will be no redundancies, as were planned in the Consultation Document.  I have now (24th July) received the following reply to my request asking for the number of staff who have resigned for this summer, after a month's allowable delay whilst considering the public interest test: 'We have now completed our assessment of the public interest test. Having done so, we believe that for the reasons we have already identified, namely due to the reorganisation of Folkestone Academy which is referred to in our letter of 25th June, that at present the public interest in maintaining the exemptions outweighs the public interest in disclosing the balance of the information. In the circumstances, your request is declined and the information will not at present be released'. I must confess I cannot see any public interest in  withholding the information, given that I have already published an insider view there were 23 such teaching staff. I would have thought the school would want to correct it if wrong, and can see no public interest in withholding it because of a reorganisation that should have been completed by the time this reply was sent out. I am of course challenging this refusal.

I was pleased for the school, but very surprised, to learn that 'for Leadership posts at Folkestone Academy, we received an excellent field of candidates for all positions that were advertised externally - all were passionate about the vision we have as a Trust'. These included the extreme shortage posts of Heads of Mathematics and English, advertised through their bizarre job advertisements, and with closing dates after the resignation dates from other schools for experienced teachers, all in a climate subsequently describedby Dr Saxton in the TES article as: “Nationally, we know there’s a recruitment and retention issue in teaching – it is exacerbated out here. As one of my colleague jokes, half our pool for any recruitment process are literally fish” (as a literal statement, hardly flattering!). Yes, it all sounds fishy!

The Interim Principal of the Secondary Academy is Colin Boxall, appointed through an agency, although elsewhere described as coming from the wider Turner Schools team, was appointed in January until the summer. He is now leaving the school, 'having provided interim support' an unusual description for the role of Principal. In response to my question about which Outstanding Kent Academy he was Principal of, as explicitly  claimed by Dr Saxton in a signed letter to parents, she now claims she cannot speak to his history. He has been aided by Head of School, Wesley Carroll. Mr Jason Feldwick, Principal of St Augustine's Academy, Maidstone, is joining the school on part-time secondment, to 'provide additional leadership capacity'. It looks therefore as if FA has been unable to recruit a new Executive Principal even through it advertises through Saxton Bampfylde, 'one of the world’s leading independent executive search firms', alongside Harrow and other elite private schools.   Is the 'Saxton' part of the firm coincidence or a connection with Dr Saxton?

Meanwhile, the academy is closing its innovative Sixth Form Centre, the Glassworks, opened in 2013 in the centre of town under the previous ownership and catering for the current 279 Sixth Form pupils. This also contains the Academy's administrative address - two miles from the school. Apparently, although the 'The main academy was built to accommodate every year group, including Post 16', and rolls are falling, the academy has been funded for eight new classrooms to be built to accommodate the move. 

An article describing the Trust as 'The group with an ambitious plan to turn Folkestone Academy into the best school in the south of England' describes  'ambitious plans to transform the two worst performing secondary schools in Folkestone into some of the best in the country'.  Actually, as explained in my response to Jo Saxton's letter below, Folkestone Academy was comfortably in the top half of non-selective schools in Kent on performance last year, and with the only two other schools in Folkestone being the grammar schools, the comparison is worthless. It is difficult to discern the plans laid down to achieve this aim. 

When I challenged this I received a lengthy and courteous response which identified a number of potential errors and inaccuracies. This rightly spelled out in different ways: ‘There is no public interest in disseminating misinformation or inaccuracies. The public interest is best served when factual statements that are made are verified and underpinned by evidence, especially on controversial topics’. Unfortunately, she misunderstands where I obtain my material from, which is primarily official sources in the public domain verified and underpinned by evidence, only then confirmed by personal testimony.

Her other main issues are as follows:

 Turner Schools is a not for profit and none of its leaders have ever been in the service of for profit schools. (I have never claimed otherwise)

 You allege that we are heading into difficulty with all of our schools; yet we have significant successes in each which I would be delighted to talk to you and show you about, including at Morehall and Martello, where twice as many pupils are now able to read at their chronological age. (There are indeed some successes, but this response  does not address the failings)

 You state that we are failing to attract pupils, but we are daily receiving parents seeking places in each of our schools, meaning that there are some years in Morehall with a waiting list. In addition, the Local Authority have informed us that they expect final numbers will be higher than those published earlier in the year after re-allocation. In addition, Morehall has had spaces throughout the past decade. The roll is now stable +/- 10 pupils on average since we inherited it, so it is incorrect to imply that it has spaces due to Turner Schools, it had vacancies under Lilac Sky and under the Local Authority. Martello Primary was built by the Local Authority for basic need provision, has had Years R-5 since Turner Schools has been responsible for it, with 145 on roll at present and its first Year 6 this year. KCC are clear it was built to provide capacity so it incorrect to present this capacity as unpopularity. Folkestone Primary is oversubscribed, and Folkestone Academy receives daily requests from families to move in. Just last week, I met week with a Year 7 boy delighted to have been admitted from Astor now that a space has come up. Turner Free School has had two applicants for every place, and has an active waiting list. (see my response refuting, with evidence, the key assertions).

 In terms of the Martello leadership structure, there have not been three Executive Heads. There has been a fixed term Executive Head initially, a substantive Executive Head and once stabilised, a Principal. The substantive Executive Head remains actively involved with the school as Chair of Governors (agreed, Martello Academy has had just two Executive Heads, plus Dr Saxton as Headteacher).

 Reform at Folkestone Academy is to integrate academic and pastoral life so that the school’s students achieve their full potential. No teachers are being made redundant and there will not be 42 redundancies; this is about reform not finance (see Consultation Document which identifies 42 positions to go, including 24 teachers, because of ‘straitened’ finances. Because of the large number of teacher resignations, it is now probably true there is no need for redundancies. 

 Numbers at Turner Free School, and publication thereof: we have never published anything about number of places taken up on the Turner Free School holding page (the full website is in development now policies have been approved by the DfE and clearance for readiness to open has been given) (a month has gone since this letter was sent, but still no ‘full website’. The current website makes no mention it is to be replaced) . The article about 70 applications was on the Turner Schools website and it was published on 10th November 2017 (this was removed to avoid further confusion) (removed around 23^rd May only after my article pointed it out). The school had received 120 written acceptances by March 23, and this was communicated to parents, for whom we operate direct means of communication. The Local Authority have been informed of all TFS admission information throughout and are handling appeals. No family has accepted a place at Turner Free School and at Folkestone Academy (not true from personal contacts with families). 

 I have not read them, but am advised that many of the comments posted on your site made defamatory statements about me and the Trust (why has Dr Saxton not read the comments before making this serious allegation? She has not replied to my request to identify potentially defamatory comments; oddly since I offered to remove any such. In any case, I cannot find any such, especially as to the best of my knowledge as all my statements are supported by evidence).

I responded to this letter on 26^th June, in which I provide a refutation to all of Dr Saxton's allegations except the one, about Executive Headship at Martello Academy which I acknowledge what appears a technical error. 

Four Questions (amongst many)

I concluded by asking three questions I believe are important to which I had had no response (but see more recent updates) . These are:

a) You have describe Mr Boxall as having been 'Principal of a number of schools, including an Outstanding Academy in Kent'. Can you please confirm which is the Outstanding Academy?

b) As you will be aware I have updated my article as further objective information has come in. The Section on FA now includes the following about staff vacancies: Four of these are Heads of Department, so will be unlikely to attract external applicants, as 31st May is the final day for submitting resignations for September. Three of these are for the major Departments of English, Maths and Geography. I happened to look at the first two. Oddly, they have a completely different structure, reflecting a school that has no clear strategy. Both have a very general introductory page, sent out for some reason from the Sixth Form Centre, but neither gives any indication of the radical change of approach set out in the reorganisation Consultation. The English Head of Departmentthen turns via a Word download into a five page very generalised essay, although indicating that the successful applicants will be in charge of a single Key Stage, probably KS3. Amongst the specifics: the challenge of 'To establish strong cross-curricular links with other departments including helping to establish key numeracy skills', and 'Evaluating the design and delivery of the curriculum for a Key Stage in Dance'. The Mathematics Head of Department details lead in to a Head of Faculty, although Faculties are to be scrapped according to the reorganisation document. This follows into a single website page, multi-coloured and shouting (their word not mine!) that makes no mention of mathematics from beginning to end, but is merely yet another collection of generalised slogans! Try: 'Courage - To exhibit positivity and determination in your sprint and marathon goals'. There is no clue as to whether Courage is a requirement, a hope, or just a thought. There is no sign of planning or strategy here, just a sense of ad hoc decision making outside any sort of framework.
The appointment of Senior Staff is critical to any school. Would you not agree that these two job adverts show nothing better than sheer incompetence by those responsible for recruitment?

c) TFS now has four staff appointed for its 120 pupils in Year 7, a Principal and three highly qualified and experienced Assistant Principals (and therefore presumably highly paid). FA staff contracts have been changed to enable the Trust to order teachers to work elsewhere in the Trust including TFS. How many other teachers have been appointed to work primarily at TFS, and what will those highly experienced Assistant Principals be doing with their time?

Also in the letter, I posed the question about where the pupils come from to fill the Magic Money Pot. I am happy to be corrected in my data if I have made an error.

However, in addition to these four questions there are so many issues relating to Turner Schools, of a scale I have never come across before. September will no doubt answer some of them, but the chaotic nature of so many of these hardly gives one confidence. 

The key statement in the School Case to the Appeal Panel is as follows:

This curriculum is designed for the top 25% of the ability range. Students below this level would struggle to engage with the curriculum and its delivery. Therefore, students who have not been deemed selective should not be considered for a place at Holcombe Grammar School. Any score around the 100 mark, (50th percentile) indicates average. A score below 100 suggests that there may be difficulty in that area unless there are mitigating circumstances.The school case is signed off by Mr Gwynn Bassan, Executive Principal, April 2018.

The problem is that this Case uses data applicable to the Kent Test, very different from the Medway Test, and so seriously flawed. The issues are explained in detail here. As a result this sets a bar far higher than the Medway Test as the two are not comparable in any way. Kent data would however be familiar to the Appeal Panel provided by Kent County Council after the previous Panel understandably withdrew and it appears from Appeal notes that at no point was the discrepancy explained.  

'It is unfortunate that Mr Bassam, in the school statement, fails to understand the scoring system of the Medway Test, claiming that a score of 100 is that of the average child, and so a score of under 100 is unacceptable. In fact, it is the score of the average Medway child taking the Medway Test, which is very different. Indeed, a child with a score under 100 in all three tests, can qualify for Holcombe Grammar School under the Medway Test arrangements. Mr Bassam also falsely claims on this basis that ‘Therefore, students who have not been deemed selective should not be considered for a place at Holcombe Grammar School.’ This is the role of the appeal panel and he therefore denies the role of the appeal panel to come to their own opinion on this matter. Can you please confirm that Mr Bassam or his representative will be correcting these mistakes at each appeal, so the Appeal Panel is not misled?'

After an initial hiccup when the school could not even find its own copy of the school case, and asked me to provide it (!) I received the following:

'Mr Bassan understands the scoring of the Medway Test very clearly and did not refer to 100 as being the score of an average child.  The Panel asked him for the highest score from a case in each category and the lowest score so that they could make an informed decision of the ability of the child'.

Of course, this is a false claim as the school case, signed by Mr Bassan, explicitly states that Any score around the 100 mark, (50th percentile) indicates average, also highlighted in his statement above. I can see no way that asking for a highest and lowest score can enable a Panel to make an informed decision on ability of a specific

Not surprisingly, I took my FOI to the next Stage of Internal Review, writing:

‘I do not understand how Mr Bassan can deny what he put explicitly in writing. Further, you make it clear he did not correct this mistake in writing. …I remain unclear from your response whether this is a misunderstanding of the Medway Test scoring system, or a deliberate attempt to mislead the Panel. I cannot see an alternative explanation for this statement, but am happy to receive one. It is unfortunate you have chosen not to respond to my challenge about: “Mr Bassam also falsely claims on this basis that ‘’Therefore, students who have not been deemed selective should not be considered for a place at Holcombe Grammar School’’’.

On 9^th July, I received a Response that at last acknowledged ‘that the case from Mr Bassan does clearly state that “Any score around the 100 mark, (50^th percentile) indicates average”.  I have clarified with Mr Bassan and he has confirmed that this was an error in the letter’. Actually, it is the central part of the case (not a letter)! No mention of the false claims denying this in between, or any hint of apology to anyone.

The internal Review then claims that Mr Bassan provided the accurate information verbally to the panel at the appeals hearing, as the  Reviewer confirmed by looking at the Minutes of appeal meetings.‘These minutes support the verbal case Mr Bassan provided the panel and it has been recorded that Mr Bassan outlines in his case the average scores for each paper: 105 for English; 108 for maths and 106 for reasoning. In addition, the panel asked on a number of occasions the highest and lowest scores achieved by students who had been allocated a place.  Therefore, the panel had a very accurate picture of the type of scores students who passed the 11+ achieved’.

I have copies of four sets of Notes (they are not Minutes) of Appeal Meetings. There is no mention in any of these that Mr Bassan supplied the accurate information, or in any way acknowledged that the Case for the School was untrue! Nor is there any reference to the claim about average scores. Nor is it the recollection of these families that such statements were made. I suppose it could be a remarkable coincidence that these sets of parents were singled out not to be told the truth! I can see from the wording chosen in the response that Mr Bassan may have outlined the average scores for each paper on one occasion (although all families are entitled to the same information), but I can see no way that either this or knowing highest and lowest scores benefits the decision making of the appeal panel.

Even the conclusion that ‘the panel had a very accurate picture of the type of scores students who passed the 11+ achieved’, is false. The lowest score of any student ‘who passed the 11+’ was of course the pass mark of 495. According to a separate FOI, there was just one appeal heard from a boy who had been found selective, so there is no way the Panel could form ‘a very accurate picture of the type of scores students who passed the 11+ achieved’ from this one case. There is no record that they asked for other such cases. 

The Internal Review ends with: ‘I have finally reviewed the successful appeals that have been allocated and can also report that 2 successful applicants were supported who had scores below 100 which supports the view that the panel did not reject appeals on the basis you have identified. I therefore conclude that the written statement provided by the school is misleading however that at the appeal meeting the verbal presentation was correct and the panel understood this and therefore I do not support your view that this was deliberate’.

There is no recorded verbal presentation supporting this conclusion in the notes I have examined. I have never claimed the written statement was deliberately misleading; I put it down as one of two alternatives and asked which. I can only therefore conclude this is an admission of failure to understand. There were three successful appeals from boys who had not passed. Two had scores below 100, so one had all scores 100 or more, so he must have passed. Just a minor mistake compared to the others!

This response confirms my initial view that the Case for the School was misleading, arose because the author of it did not understand how the Medway Test operates, as supported by the subsequent and contradictory attempts to explain it away.

The above failures surely invalidate the whole appeal process, whilst the attempts to cover up this shocking situation surely reflect a culture that permeates previous controversial failures by the Trust relating to Holcombe Grammar School, as described here. Still, with the current lack of academy accountability, presumably Holcombe Grammar School and the Thinking Schools Academy Trust, ably supported by Medway Council, will simply march on to the next controversy. 

As I have pointed out previously, the Council did not have the right to refuse places on the waiting list, as Holcombe Grammar School is the legal Admission Authority, and so able to make such decisions.  By delegating operation of the waiting list to Medway it temporarily gave up that power. According to the letter, when Holcombe learned only yesterday that Medway was intransigent it decided to take back control of its waiting list and place the boys on it.

I have long maintained that all Medway schools should do the same, with academies able to as a right, and I hope this lesson will be learned by others.

I must confess on what I had seen previously, my assumption was that the sticking point was Holcombe Grammar School, because of the sequence of apparent events outlined in my previous articles, together with the extended silence from the school (awful public relations again).

The good news for at least some of these families is that it is likely most, if not all, of the 28 London boys awarded places on allocation will be looking for appropriate schools nearer their home as a preference and there will inevitably be some movement as a result. I know from enquiries I have received, asking about the school, that some boys who were allocated to the school have never visited Holcombe or even Chatham, or knew anything about it when they applied!

One has to ask why Medway Council have refused to budge, against the school‘s wishes, when it did not even have the legal right to do so. It certainly was not in the interests of local children, as so often in issues about Medway Council, and as described previously on this website.

Too often since its take over by Thinking Schools Academy Trust I have been highly critical of decision making at Holcombe Grammar. However, in this case my criticism is just that they have left the matter so late in the school year, rather than forcing it earlier. As a result places falling vacant before now will also have been taken up by London families, rather than those local boys who are now qualified. 

Last year, Kent taxpayers paid for 15,937 children to take the Kent Test, from a total of 16,766 who registered. Of these, 4,832 were from outside the county (with some late applicants in addition). 2735 of these passed the Kent Test with just 456 being allocated places in a Kent grammar school, over half to the four Dartford schools, setting up waves that follow right through to Sittingbourne, as seen in my recent articles about Holcombe Grammar in Chatham. Contrary to some views expressed, grammar schools make no financial contribution to the Test, the cost of Test Centres,  or of administration. 

I applaud the four Kent grammar schools that have changed their admission criteria to give priority to local children in this selective authority, which broadly aims to provide grammar school places for 25% of its own school population, so that a large influx of oocs inevitably reduces opportunity in the affected areas. 

Some correspondents take exception to my usage of the term ‘11+ M25 tourists’ which aptly describes families who apply to grammar schools all round the M25 ring, from Sutton, up to Enfield and round to Kent, often 'just for practice'. For some reason they have been proud to post this on the Forum over the years. Pity the poor child who is heavily coached for multiple tests, and then transported long distances to places across South East England s/he has never visited to take tests for grammar schools s/he knows nothing about, often 'just for practice'.

The Kent contributor has made  17 postings on this one topic, mainly derogatory about KCC, and some very lengthy, also a common theme in her postings in other sections. None of these apply to her as, living on the edge of Kent on the border with Surrey, she will have a very limited perspective and a wider range of opportunities than most, so a mystery as to motive. 

The problem is actually worse in Buckinghamshire, with a posting noting: ‘In 2017, 1393 children from Greater London took the Bucks test, and precisely 13 of them went on to receive a place at a Bucks grammar, all siblings of existing pupils. 1380 children tested for absolutely no purpose or reward, but even when faced with these facts, parents don't withdraw their child from testing’. How ridiculous!

I have no problem with families seeking the best opportunity for their children, but they must appreciate that shouting about it can cause considerable grief to those whose children miss out on local grammar school places as a consequence, or else make wrong decisions on the basis of what they have read on this Forum (it happens!). 

I believe the term ‘collateral damage’ used by politicians to dehumanise war-time civilian casualties is entirely appropriate for such victims of schools without a proper moral compass.

Invicta Grammar, as an academy technically directly accountable to Department for Education through the SE Regional Schools Commissioner, should have been dealt with equally firmly. I challenged the DfE on the matter, but was told it would be up to case law to determine the matter, and there the matter rested until I was contacted by St Olave’s parents and advised them to take legal advice.

Since my exposure of the issue, numbers of students leaving after Year 12 in Kent and Medway grammar schools dropped sharply for 2017, the St Olave’s case showing it had not been widely accepted elsewhere. I am confident it was also happening in non-selective schools, although this is impossible to pin down using census data (my technique before students started contacting me individually), as many students would be leaving anyway at the end of Year 12, after following one-year courses.

 I have spoken and corresponded with many of the Invicta Grammar victims of the collateral damage as Invicta relentlessly pursued its target of excellence for its A Level grades, featured in all its literature. You will find some of their testimonies as comments at the foot of the original article. The fact that it has also has one of lowest staying on levels into the Sixth Form of any grammar school in Kent is another indicator that all is not well.

There is of course also a wider issue, the overall lack of accountability to the Regional Schools Commissioner and DfE. These argue that Ofsted and academic performance are sufficient to monitor most issues, but failures such as this and other exclusion and Home Education matters, financial irregularities, meltdown between Ofsted, or in the large gaps that exist between checks for new academies or change of ownership, the negative consequences of what I call Tough Love – with its own built in collateral damage, etc, etc, show they are not!

Try my articles on Lilac Sky, Turner Schools, Oasis Isle of Sheppey Academy, SchoolsCompany, Holcombe Grammar School, the Williamson Trust, Invicta Grammar, Ebbsfleet Academy, Failure to provide appropriate non-selective provision in Tunbridge Wells, Medway UTC, Knole Academy, Swale Academies Trust, to see too many failures to take action. Please note that several of these items have links to multiple articles as stories unfold.

 My challenge was  reported as: 'The objection is that the school arrangements do not comply with the Code in respect of the oversubscription criteria that give priority to siblings or to children of staff in any school in the multi academy trust'.

Brompton Academy is the most oversubscribed non-selective school in Medway and second most popular school taking Kent into account, turning away 193 first choices this year, with very few children being awarded places on appeal, so there is a tight geographical ring of offers around the school. As a result, fairness in school admissions is critical. The school is in an Academy Trust with Chatham Grammar School for Girls, which is usually undersubscribed for its 142 places and as a result admits a large number of out of county girls annually. 

The proposal for school arrangements was that the Admission Criteria should include the two sections:

My objections were that this would allow siblings of girls and children of staff at Chatham Girls Grammar who may live miles away to have priority over local girls, both of which breached the Schools Admission Code. 

Whilst the Schools Adjudicator agreed with me on both parts, he did not need to rule as Brompton Academy withdrew both, returning to the previous lawful criteria allowing preference to siblings and children of staff at Brompton Academy only.  

As an addition, the Adjudicator recorded that 'The Code says in paragraph 1.39 that priority may be given to children of staff where “the member of staff has been employed at the school for two or more years', (not the Academy Trust), and the time limit in this was not mentioned by Brompton Academy. This will also need to be changed. I await decisions on the other three schools: Fort Pitt Grammar; Holcombe Grammar; and The Rochester Grammar. 

I also have reports of a fourth school in serious difficulties, in Medway, but need more information to go ahead with confidence that may be difficult over the summer holiday. 

One other London appointment arrived in January at the well performing and happy Fairview Primary School. Mrs Faye Rider came with a strong record from her previous post as Head of School at an Ofsted Outstanding school in Walthamstow, determined to make a difference. Sadly there was a rapid change in culture including very tough discipline and an early decision to set by ability that went down badly, quickly leading to large and important staff resignations. It is reported that the headteacher had little understanding of how an LA school worked. Concerns were first raised with me in April and, by the second week of the new term, letters home to parents were being signed by the Deputy Head. She became Acting Head at the start of Term 6, although no explanation appears to have been forthcoming but the school confirmed to me that Mrs Rider left before the end of term, and now appears to have taken up a post in Sussex. 

Tunbury Primary School, Walderslade, Kent

Although this school is in Walderslade, Chatham, north of the M2, it is situated in Kent Local Authority rather than Medway. This is another school where I have received concerns from staff and parents over a period of time about the robust style of the headteacher since her appointment at the beginning of 2013. She took over from a highly respected headteacher, Mrs Heather Brown. Such an appointment is always difficult, and a high rate of staff turnover can be necessary to move a school on, but even Ofsted clearly had concerns by the end of the year, although still finding the school ‘Good’ on a short Inspection: ‘You have an unwavering commitment to making sure that the quality of teaching and learning is good despite the many changes of staff and difficulties in recruiting permanent teachers. Senior leaders closely monitor the quality of teaching and learning and offer support and guidance if your high expectations are not met. Rapid improvement is expected and rigorous performance management targets are set for staff’. Also:  ‘You are acutely aware, however, of the concerns about leadership and management expressed by a number of parents. You acknowledge that you have not yet secured the confidence of these parents. Parents also, understandably, have concerns about the number of different teachers some classes have had. Your high expectations for the quality of teaching are partly, but not exclusively, a reason for many of the changes in staffing’.

Both quotes are indicative of a style driven by pressure to deliver high performance. It is of course one of the reasons for high teacher turnover as teachers who see the profession as a vocation cease to feel valued. I do believe that such pressures, often leading to low morale in a school, play a greater factor than teacher pay in the high number of teachers walking away from the profession.

After a previous long period of stability and high standards, most recently under headteacher Llew Jones, who retired around 2001, the school was subject to repeated failure and a high turnover of headteachers, including seven in the past five years. The school rapidly fell into Serious Weaknesses (Ofsted 2003), the first of three failed Ofsteds, interspersed with several inadequate Monitoring Inspections., including one after the most recent ‘Requires Improvement’ last year. Twice there have been plans to expand this failing school to ease pressure on places in Northfleet, in spite of KCC principles that only Good or Outstanding schools should be enlarged. Both have been cancelled because of perceived but false insufficient demand, leaving Northfleet families struggling to find places, most recently this year. As a result some Northfleet families have been taxied across to East Gravesend schools as there were no vacancies locally. I have written up the problems a number of times over the past seven years, most recently here. In the meantime Ofsted has repeatedly highlighted a large turnover of teachers: 2016 ‘Each year, a large number of new teachers join the school but do not stay’; ‘Eleven new teachers took up post in September 2017’. The Ofsted Monitoring Inspection of October under most recent Head, Kevin Holmes, appointed May 2017 was critical of the leadership and oversight of Reach2, the Academy Trust which took over the school in 2013: ‘The school is not improving quickly enough. In a period of significant turbulence in staffing and leadership, standards have fallen further in all key stages since the previous inspection’; ‘’Now approaching four years since the school re-opened as an academy, by its own admission the trust has still not been successful in securing a good quality of education for pupils’.

Now Mr Holmes, who also recently had a spell running the disastrous Istead Rise Primary another school with an appalling record, and described as an experienced head by Ofsted, left suddenly without notice or explanation in June. The school is now run by Paul Voural, Associate School Leader for Reach2, whose own previous headship appears to have had its difficulties.

There were no reception class vacancies at all in Northfleet this year apart from a fruitless expansion of 30 places at Copperfield, with the school receiving 11 Local Authority Allocations to top its numbers up to 60, the only local school not full of children who had chosen it. In the meantime, nearby Cecil Road Primary, whose previous head was removed just over three years ago, has flourished to become one of the most oversubscribed schools in Kent as parents try and avoid Copperfield.

The £200,000 investment by the Goldsmiths Livery Company was featured in a previous article last year, and has already seen a boost in mathematics performance in the three schools. As part of the initiative they have to work on community engagement as well as inside the schools.

I talked with many of those who visited the exhibition, which included a mathematics trail, and displays of the work carried out over the previous week. The most common comment was along the lines of 'I didn't know they did that in primary schools' as visitors looked at problem solving and other more advanced concepts, also being entertained by singing and dance groups.    

I must declare my interest in that I was a previous governor at both Kings Farm and Whitehill Infant School, the latter before it joined with the Junior School. I remain active in support of Kings Farm, and celebrated with them, its recent Good Ofsted Inspection Report.

Photographs courtesy of Kent Messenger Group

firstly KCC’s setting up its own commercial business to provide services to academies and other schools. This is called'The Educaion People', a title unfortunately previously acquired by another company. The Chair of the Board is Patrick Leeson recent retired as Corporate Director of Kid's Education and Children's Services Directorate. The new CEO is James Roberts who has spent many years in education in Dubai, most recently as Director of Standards for Innoventures  Education, a  federation of five private schools and several nurseries. He  is reported as having a good 'knowledge of current developments and priorities in education in the UK and in particular in Kent.'

The second item was a story about Dane Court Grammar planning some classes of 60 pupils to meet financial pressures, and presumably teacher shortages. Hardly surprising in my view, schools are currently under immense pressure from both these issues and indeed many of the new build PFI schools were built to deliberately cater for this idea, using one teacher, supported by Teacher Assistants. Is it a good idea? Fortunately, I am not the one who has to balance the books at a time of dwindling funds.

Oddly under the new Principal's Welcome one could never guess the school had changed ownership from a troubled school just a few months ago, as he talks about its heavenly ethos where all is wonderful. It even contains positive quotes from the Ofsted of May 2016, selecting from a generally negative Report about Corelli College, but without acknowledging they are nothing to do with the new incarnation of Halley College or of Leigh Academy Trust. 

With the school being subsequently the second worst GCSE performer in Greenwich in 2017 in both Progress8 and Attainment8 and in financial difficulties, the Regional Schools Commissioner appears to have acted very quickly in re-brokering it, certainly compared for example to SchoolsCompany, Lilac Sky and more recently Future Schools Trust. The school is now overseen by David Millar, Executive Head, who is also responsible for Stationers' Crown Woods Academy which has been with Leigh Academy since 2013. Mr Millar moved suddenly from a short period in his previous post as Principal of the troubled Oasis Academy Isle of Sheppey in 2016. 

Update: The comment below from a well informed source highlights the issue. The recent takeover of the Williamson Trust should cause the Trustees of the Sir Joseph Williamson's Charitable Trust to be cautious. Whilst independent of the Academy Trust, it is a wealthy charity and in 2017 donated £244,677 to The Math (and £200 to Rochester Grammar School), surely making it the wealthiest state school in Kent and Medway. There are of course many ways to shift funds around between an Academy Trust's schools!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 

From Private Eye, June 2018

ACADEMY SCHOOLS

Greenwich lean time

The Department for Education repeatedly reassures opponents of academies that school land is not being given away on an enormous scale - yet a rebrokering deal in Greenwich has seen taxpayers shell out £1.5m this year to settle a "disputed interest" in school land.

The former Kidbrooke School became an academy in 2011, changing its name to Corelli College. It was run by Corelli College Co-operative Academy Trust (CCCAT), a standalone academy, with no sponsor. Christine Grice, one of Greenwich's ruling Labour councillors, was a governor of the trust.

Minutes from 2011 show that land and buildings were to be transferred to the school on a 125-year lease at a peppercorn rent and that "safeguards provide for the land to be returned to the local authority if the school is discontinued". The minutes also note that "matters to be resolved" include whether disused tennis courts, a plot of land next to the school entrance and a manager's house should be included in the lease or retained by the council.

Alas, these matters were not resolved. No formal lease was ever signed.

In 2016 Corelli College was given a "requires improvement" rating by Ofsted, and by 2017 it had a significant deficit. In May 2017 the regional schools commissioner brought in Leigh Academy Trust (LAT), a multi-academy trust running 16 other schools, to take over.LAT checked out the school and promptly asked for £500,000 from Greenwich for essential health and safety work. This was agreed in January as a grant "in recognition of ' the retention of land and premises manager's' house", which would definitely be excluded from the lease this time around.

In February, however, another report to the leader of Greenwich council sought agreement to pay LAT a further "£ 1m settlement in respect of a disputed interest in land". According to that report, the school will now get a five-year licence to use the house and land but they are not to be included in the long lease. The report says the house and the plot next to the entrance are valued at £lm for residential purposes (thanks to London housing prices) and that selling the sites is a possibility in future.

"Further negotiations will risk delay to the school receiving permanent leadership and could potentially lead to the school being without a sponsor, both of which could have a detrimental impact on children's learning," said the report.

When Cllr Spencer Drury queried why the land had not just reverted to the council when CCCAT was disbanded, he was told that a change in sponsor was not the same as a school being discontinued (Peter: although Ofsted describes the school as 'closed'). Nevertheless, it seems baffling that Greenwich is paying a trust a £500,000 grant and a £lm settlement over land it wasn't supposed to give away in the first place.

The school has now transferred to Leigh Academy Trust and been re-renamed the Halley Academy.

For the overwhelming majority of candidates who attend Kent schools, the Test is set in their own school, at no additional cost to the Authority.

This article is a continuation of a previous one entitled Kent Test: Out of County Applications looking at the more general issues.

I don’t have any data for the 1063 Medway Test out of county candidates, just 185 of whom were offered places, but it is reasonable to assume it is of the same order.

In my view this is an unfair charge on the home Local Authorities of Kent and Medway, but can see no way in which these costs can be recovered.

The interview took place, with permission, in the splendid grounds of the thriving and oversubscribed Malling School, much changed from the struggling institution of a few years ago and showing what can be done under strong leadership without academisation.

The core of the GCSE change is to focus on a single written examination at the end of Year Eleven, which is of greater difficulty than in previous years. In order to achieve the slightly higher pass rate this summer at 66.9% of entries at the new Grade 4 or above, of course the pass marks are lowered, making any claim for higher standards a logical nonsense.

The BBC sets out a clear description of the new grade structure here, the 6 pass grades instead of four introducing a false precision. However, more confusing is the splitting of the previous widely understood pass grade C into two, Levels 4 (standard pass) and 5 (strong pass). Not surprisingly, organisations: schools; colleges; training providers; and employers are split as to which of these to take as minimum level.

The so called ‘English Baccalaureate’ gives priority in league tables to pupils taking: English language and literature; maths; at least a double science; history or geography; and a language. This totals seven subjects and as a result there is a decline in subjects not in the lists such as technology, arts subjects, music, and languages. This seeks to take on the prestige of the term ‘Baccalaureate’ which generally refers to qualifications with a wide spread of subjects, especially at Sixth Form Level. However, the English Baccalaureate is actually the converse, forcing many English pupils to make unduly restrictive choices and by squeezing out vocational subjects is making the curriculum less palatable of the less academic pupil.

Sadly, academic opportunities at 16 plus are also shrinking as schools come under pressure to achieve higher A Level performance and so many grammar and non-selective schools are raising their entry requirements in terms of GCSE performance.

In addition, financial pressures are causing schools to cut down on the number of A Level options, or in the case of some non-selective schools scrapping them completely. Three of the four Kent FE Colleges have already abolished all A Level courses, the fourth, the Hadlow Group offering just 14 A Levels at its West Kent site in Tonbridge, although just half of these are mainstream academic subjects.

I could continue in this vein for much longer; but just a few points.

1. A government requirement is that all young people continue their education up to the age of 18, either full-time in schools and college, or through apprenticeships and other work and training options. Full details here. However, as noted above, opportunities are decreasing and the government's apprenticeship drive is failing to deliver numbers of placements.
2. The UK has possible the fiercest external examination scheme in Europe at the end of compulsory education at 16+, with many countries focusing their attention on performance at 18+.
3. For too many schools, the obsession with GCSE league table performance now means that pupils start their GCSE courses at the beginning of Year Nine for what is officially a two year course. This mean pupils have to cut out important aspects of their education, especially when combined with the Baccalaureate.
4. We won’t know the breakdown of GCSE performance for individual schools until publication of the Provisional Results on 31^st October, early individual press releases often presenting a distorted picture.
5. I don’t normally report on A Level outcomes, as these are so dependent upon the required starting point for A Level courses.

It is very common for admission to Sixth Form courses, especially for grammar schools, to consist of conditional offers based on projected GCSE scores from the current school. It is my opinion that this is an unlawful procedure as it does not follow the School Admissions Code, Section 2.6, page 22. It is certainly not objective as required by the Code.  However, challenging this is fraught with difficulties and any appeal is unlikely to be settled before the end of Term 1, by which time the student will be way behind on the curriculum even if the appeal is upheld.

Closing dates for applications are often set as early as January in Year Eleven, so that students with unexpectedly high or low GCSE scores may have limited if any opportunities to change their planned pathway.

One recent example of illegal manipulation of sixth form offers occurred at Maidstone Grammar School for Girls where I secured an Ombudsman ruling against the school last year. Amazingly, the proposed oversubscription criteria for 2019-20 remain illegal on a variety of fronts, primarily that there are different academic criteria for external and internal applicants, explicitly contrary to the School Admissions Code. Unfortunately, it is now too late to challenge this. The criteria for entrance to the Sixth Form this September are not published and so should be unchanged, following those of the flawed 2017-18 rules. Instead,  there is a wholly inadequate set of rules published on the school website that do not even cover oversubscription criteria.

Whilst MGGS is surely one of the worst culprits in using illegal admission criteria for its sixth form, sadly it is surely not alone.

For 2017, the grammar school losing most pupils was  Invicta Grammar with 3%. For 2018, there were five grammars with 2% of pupils lost.

The key date is the January census in Year 11, as pupils leaving after this time are still counted in the GCSE statistics, so there is not such a strong incentive for schools to see them leave. For 2017, I have both sets of data, showing that in some schools, another 2% of the pupil roll leaves in the run up to GCSE. 2018 GCSE results will enable me to update this figure. You will find the 2015-16 Kent figures here, looking in particular at High Weald Academy with its 19% figure, the highest in the county, and a special look at the tactics applied by Oasis Academy Isle of Sheppey, which show no sign of weakening after yet another new Principal has been appointed, as identified here. 

Note: M = Medway school

I am unable at present to draw a firm conclusion as to why so many pupils leave as I am awaiting 2018 data from Kent and Medway. However, my previous article looks at the evidence for 2017, revealing very high figures for families ‘choosing’ Extended Home Education (EHE) for their children from certain schools, with oral evidence of some being encouraged to leave from OAIOS,  and very high permanent exclusion figures for Medway schools. There are also considerable numbers of children who simply disappear from schools without trace.

Medway UTCis clearly a disaster area as explained in an article I wrote in May which also looked at the failures of the UTC concept in general. With pupils only joining the school in Year 10,  they have found a very poor school as set out in great detail by Ofsted and so it appears that up to a quarter of pupils have clearly realised their mistakes, with many presumably returning to their previous schools.

I have also looked at Ebbsfleet, Oasis Academy Isle of Sheppeyand Hartsdown in an article called ‘Tough Love Academies’ and elsewhere, showing how they operate a pressured environment that sees pupils unable to cope being withdrawn, often with nowhere else to go, so they ‘opt’ for EHE, certainly in the case of Sheppey with active encouragement from the school. Another about the Brook Learning Trust also looks at Ebbsfleet, along with High Weald Academy.

Both New Line Learning and Cornwallis Academies have been struggling for some years, as I have also recorded, to the extent that the Academy Trust which ran them is being taken over next month by the Every Child, Every Day Academy Trust, which has recently been supporting both schools. It is fair to point out that both schools, along with Hartsdown, suffer from having part of their intake being somewhat mobile in the first place.

Orchards Academy with the highest losses leading up to the 2017 GCSEs, also features in an earlier article, which highlights that school as one of the top performers at Progress 8, the key GCSE measure, in 2017. Losing 17% of the cohort no doubt helped! Another top performer was the controversial Duke of York’s Royal Military Academy, which lost 10% in 2017. However, in its capacity as a Boarding School primarily for military families, this fall could either be for families moving on for service reasons, or else removing their children from the school because of the controversies. Surprisingly, the consistently highest non-selective GCSE performer, Bennett Diocesan Memorial School, had next highest losses at 6%.

St John Fisher Roman Catholic School in Medway is surely the least popular school in the Authority with 58 Local Authority Allocations this year. This means there are many families taking up places at the school who don’t want to be there, a factor also affecting Ebbsfleet (67), Hartsdown (85), OAIOS (70), and Victory (41, highest Non-Selective Progress 8 performance at GCSE in Medway).

Please note that I have limited data from Medway Council who have resisted providing the relevant information. They have recently been found guilty of refusing to provide data to me, by the Information Commissioner. In spite of instructions from the Commissioner, the Council has failed to provide the data I have provided.

Paul Carter is reported as saying that 'the problem was more concentrated in the eastern half of Kent rather than in areas such as Tonbridge and Tunbridge Wells, where selective schools are in demand from families in Sussex and London boroughs', although I do believe that there is a real problem in the West of the county, where grammar schools are under siege from out of county families and some local children are squeezed out as a consequence. This year the two Dartford grammar schools saw just six successful appeals out of 218 between them!The allegedly high proportional rise in East Kent is, according to The Times data, of just 1.1% to 26.3% of the total in East Kent schools over the five year period, a lower increase than that in the rest of the county.

The article concludes with a worrying and false assertion by Jim Skinner, chief executive of the Grammar School Heads Association: 'Virtually all grammar schools are significantly oversubscribed and so by increasing its intake it is simply taking more of those students that were already passing the test but couldn't get in on the over-subscription criteria.'  On the contrary, whilst a quarter of Kent's grammar schools had vacancies for September 2018 after allocation in March, another seven turned away fewer than 10 first choices. 

I cannot see the Kent Test changing in character unless legislation forces it to. The government proposal to limit future expansion of grammar schools to those offering increased opportunities for pupils receiving pupil premium would surely be wrong if it offered differential standard pass rates, and remains very vague.  I have no sense of further grammar schools seeking to set their own tests amongst those with vacancies. 

It is most unfortunate that the BBC item has been published this week, attracting a large amount of media coverage in the run up to Thursday’s Kent Test. For it, and the comment now swirling around about grammar school matters in general, is likely to serve as an unnecessary distraction for many of the families whose children are sitting the test.

I believe that Mr Carter’s brief comment, made in a wider interview about coaching in private schools, was supportive of providing more equal opportunity by enabling state schools to ensure that all children are properly prepared for the Kent Test. Indeed this already happens in many schools through after school clubs and working in collaboration with grammar schools according to the policy on Social Mobility in Grammar Schools. However, many others would oppose it for a variety of reasons.

However, it is not difficult to find such schools, one such being here, still proudly claiming that the school has ‘a well-deserved reputation for the excellent preparation we provide children for grammar and independent schools entry tests at 11’.

Another once boasted of its 11+ pass rate on the side of local buses, but now more circumspectly informs parents that the school ‘is a non-selective Independent Primary School. In line with our aim to ‘maximise a child’s full potential by the time a pupil leaves the school we are justifiably proud of the number of our children that have been offered a grammar placement’. This statement is followed by the roll of grammar successes stretching back to 1994, with every year having over 90% success, 2016-17 21 out of 21.

I am confident there are many other examples out there, some more blatant than others. The general rule of thumb is that if a private school teaching to age 11 has no senior school attached, it is likely to meet parental wishes and prepare children for the Kent Test. If it has a senior school, the pressure from the school is for able pupils to stay on. Some schools teach through to age 13, preparing pupils for the Private Schools Common Entrance Test, which determines places awarded at  selective 13-18 schools. Such schools may prepare for both, whilst encouraging children to stay on for the extra two years if they have the funds to go to one of the more academically elite schools recruiting at that age (Tonbridge 13+, Sevenoaks 11+).   In my experience and according to Internet Forums, not surprisingly many parents ask if coaching is provided and will only spend their money if so. 

The bottom line is that the overwhelming reason many families choose a private primary school education costing some £10,000 per annum, is that they wish to maximise their chances of securing a grammar school place for their child. Without this incentive, many such schools would close.

I honestly don’t see anything changing as a result of a Review. KCC does its best to reduce unfairness wherever possible, and has introduced changes to the test structure to this aim, but with nearly 90% of secondary schools being academies outside KCC control, it has little power to force change through.

Postscript: The BBC has used Test Booklets by a tutoring company called CGP as background to its headlines. The Test Booklets illustrated are prepared for tests set by the CEM 11+ provider which covers the Medway and Bexley Tests but not Kent. However, the company does produce Kent Test materials featured at the foot of the page here.  

In between the two full inspections, there were four interim inspections indicating the high level of concern of the Ofsted regime. An emergency inspection in 2015 notes: ‘Leadership at the school is weak. Leaders have not been able to pull the school community together for the common good of the pupils. Serious and significant divisions between staff have led to difficulties in securing a consistent approach to tackling the management of safeguarding at the school. The ‘family ethos’ of the school has blurred the professional boundaries that are needed to maintain effective working relationships. This causes a culture of mistrust, claim and counter claim; all of which means there is too little focus on the welfare of pupils. The deputy headteacher has left the school and not been replaced. As a result, the only senior leader at the school with appropriate educational experience is the headteacher’. And still those responsible for the school did nothing! What an indictment.

Over the years when I was supporting school admission appeals, I was approached by St Christopher’s parents for assistance a number of times, but only took on one, for I found the too frequent attitude of “my child has been to St Christopher’s; I am entitled to a grammar school place”, intolerable. My previous article contains one anecdote illustrating this, and alleging maladministration of the test; another parent alleging to me that illustrations of answers and methods could be seen in the test room. For the one appeal I did carry through, I was surprised to find the headteacher turn up at the parental home for the consultation. I was dismayed by the confidence he showed that he fully understood the situation, would take charge and prepare a strong letter of support, politely implying that my input was unnecessary, whilst his comments suggested he didn’t know how the system worked or what would be required.

It is therefore no surprise that I described St Christopher’s as a dreadful school in my previous article, and that there appears to have been a loss of confidence by parents the roll having fallen by 20% over the four years between the two Inspections to 85 pupils, precipitating financial difficulties and the closure decision. Presumably, the £9975 annual fees are no longer regard as the investment the school proudly proclaimed (see my previous article).

Although this is a moderately sized junior school in the city, last year Mr Pywell was paid the highest salary of any primary head in the county, his school receiving a Good Ofsted in 2017 and a good record of success at grammar school entrance.

I am struggling to see the justification for a state school to take part in the running of a private school, although presumably there will be a management fee in return. Moreover, the KM article makes clear that St Christopher’s also had financial difficulties and has a target initial roll of 30-50 pupils, which is surely not viable in the large Victorian premises, and in any case will require an enormous input of time and energy to get the scheme off the ground.

More importantly, surely one has to ask the bigger question of the appropriateness of a scheme which diverts state school resources to supporting fee paying pupils. Mr Pywell is quoted as saying: "It is a sad situation to see such a long-established school close and we just want to try and see if there is anything we can do for those parents and children to keep it going, using our experience and resources. There could also be opportunities for children from the new school to benefit from St Stephen's facilities."

The bottom line is that this was a badly run private enterprise that rightly failed. Whilst I feel very sorry for the pupils who have been let down by St Christopher’s leaders, it can be no business of a state school to effectively re-start a new commercial company requiring a very different ethos and a demanding customer base in this way, even though presumably it would be indemnified against any financial loss.

Please note, I have further academy news which will be the subject of a subsequent article.

Sutton at Hone CofE Primary in Dartford has become part of the Aletheia Anglican Academies Trust, the Vale View Community School in Dover to be part of the Whinless Down Academy Trust, Valley Invicta Primary School at East Borough, Maidstone, has joined the Valley Invicta Academies Trust. St Mark’s CofE Primary, Eccles near Maidstone has become part of the Pilgrim Multi-Academy Trust and Wrotham Road School, in Gravesend joining the Pathway Academy Trust.

In Medway, there are Bligh Infant and Junior Schools joined the Barnsole Primary Trust; Maundene School having joined the Inspire Academy Trust; and Hilltop Primary with the Greenacre Academy Trust.

Edenbridge Primary, after a disastrous period in which KCC failed to take appropriate action was placed in in Special Measures last November. It has now been taken over as a Sponsored Academy by the Pioneer Academy Trust, which runs seven other primary academies in Bexley.

In Medway, Park Wood Infant and Junior Schools are also applying to be Converter Academies.

There are two new sponsorship Proposals in the pipeline. The first of these is for The North West Kent Alternative Provision Service, previously found Outstanding by Ofsted in 2013, but plunging to Special Measures four years later (Safeguarding is ineffective. All aspects of the school’s work have declined significantly since the last inspection. A large number of interim leadership arrangements have been ineffective. Pupils make very limited progress in all subjects. Too many staff lack basic subject knowledge. Teaching is poor. The local authority did not keep a close enough watch on the school between 2013 and 2016). There is rightly considerable concern nationally about such institutions and the long term effect on the pupils who have the misfortune to be assigned to them.

The second is for Holmesdale School, down from Good to Special Measures, that I reported on at the time, now due to be taken over by Swale Academies Trust. However, like the North School also managed by the Trust it is blocked from becoming an academy because of the PFI deal that secured new premises.

PFI Issues

You will find an alarming analysis of the finances behind all Kent’s eleven PFI schools here, undertaken by the investigative website ShepwayVox. Ten of these are currently blocked from becoming academies because of the debts to providers. Over half of KCC’s overall debt of around £740 million to the three Contractors (two of whom are off-shore companies) is still owing. I have written about these issues previously, which have the result of blocking Academy applications, but the finances have deteriorated alarmingly since then and hope to revisit this shortly.

Rebrokering

In April 2017, Turner Schools, a new Academy Trust took over the management of Folkestone Academy, leading up to a re-brokering of it in January this year. Over the eighteen months of Turner Schools control, its reputation has fallen further, with high staff turnover, pupils looking for alternative schools and a fall in morale, as outlined here, update here.

The acquisition of the Williamson Trust sees what is probably the county’s wealthiest school pass into the hands of the county’s most acquisitive. The school, which has superb facilities, much provided by the Sir Joseph Williamson's Charitable Trust, received a donation from them of £244,677 in 2017, which will have gone to a further capital project.

It has now announced a ‘merger’ to have taken place on 1^st September, with the Every Child, Every Day Academy Trust comprising two secondary schools Grey Court School in Richmond (Ofsted Outstanding) and Hollyfield School in Kingston.

In terms of performance, popularity and Free School Meal measure (NLL 50.2%) both Outer London schools can be seen to have very different populations to those serving South Maidstone. The Maidstone schools have also been under pressure from the DfE to improve standards, a Warning Notice in January 2017 issued to NLL referring to pre-warning letters to both schools also criticising leadership. This year Cornwallis had 54 vacancies (11 Local Authority Allocations) and NLL 33 (80 LAAs) in March, which will have increased by now.

It looks very much as if the Regional Schools Commissioner has proposed this as a re-broker, with the new schools expected to raise standards.

The School has now been re-brokered to the Medway based Thinking Schools Academy Trust (TSAT) which, whilst thriving internally has been the subject of a number of controversies described in these pages, for example here, with the Schools Adjudicator finding in my favour in nearly every respect, to be covered in an article shortly.

TSAT has done very well out of the takeover, for Goodwin Academy took delivery of £25 million of new premises and, under excellent new leadership, has seen the number of first preferences for admission shoot up from 77 in 2017 to 174 in 2018.

I first raised these issues in an article in January, and as a result Sir Joseph Williamson’s Mathematical School withdrew its proposals, having also put them forward  two years previously and been rejected by the Schools Adjudicator. I suspect they hoped there would be no challenge. Brompton Academy went ahead with the proposal but then withdrew it in full before the Schools Adjudicator reached a decision. 

There are four common themes in the decisions:

• The main issue across all three schools is that they wished to give priority to pupils who had siblings at other schools in the relevant Trust. There is a specific permission given in the School Admissions Code, for example for schools on the same site or close links between two single sex schools, but the Adjudicator was satisfied this did not apply in any of these three cases.
• In a second common issue for the first two schools below, the Code allows priority for children of staff at the relevant school. Each school published criteria that gave priority for children of staff at any of the Trust schools which has been found unlawful before by the Adjudicator. At a minimum this ought to have been known by those drawing up the criteria and the lawyers hired by the Thinking Schools Academy Trust for Holcombe Grammar to challenge my objection.
• The Code requires that feeder primary schools be named, but this is not the case in two of the three admission policies and the Schools Adjudicator required this to happen.
• ‘The objector argues that each year more secondary schools in the area appear to be introducing criteria that offer places to those who have attended feeder schools. The objector argues that this will lead to a growing pressure on primary schools to join multi-academy trusts so that their children can have some priority for a secondary school. It could also mean that children who do not reach the eligibility score for a selective place but who attend a feeder school for a selective school will have no priority for a place in a local school. For the reasons, I have set out above, I do not consider this concern to be well founded in relation to the existing feeder schools for the school for 2019’. However, the Adjudicator  acknowledges that this may become an issue in the future, when a different decision could be reached!

I now look at the outcomes for each school individually:

With regard to (1) above: ‘The school’s legal advisors responded that the priority is clearly set out in the criterion in compliance with the Code’….The trust’s legal advisors in setting out reasons for priority to be given based on the schools being in the same trust described the curricular and pedagogical links. I have not been provided with a reason other than that given above for why such a priority should be given for this criterion’. The school case is decisively dismissed at length.

With regard to (2): The question of the distinction between staff of the trust and staff at the school is a matter that has been raised in a previous determination for this school and the school agreed at that time to make the necessary change to its arrangements. It is disappointing to see that the school has not fully complied with the determination that upheld this point. I note that the school has accepted that an error has been made in the redrafting of its arrangements.

With regard to (3): The school argues that the names of the schools are implicit in the reference to trust schools. I do not accept this argument; the unambiguous requirement in the Code is that feeder schools are to be named

In particular, the introduction of priority for children in named feeder schools and children of members of staff at the school are both legitimate criteria, although they do not require the high level Medway Test pass of the other girls. 

The school withdrew the proposed criterion of children of members of staff at any school of the Trust, following my initial article in January. However, it still fell foul of the rules relating to siblings at other secondary schools of the Trust.

‘The trust’s legal advisor makes the case that the schools within the trust are linked for curriculum purposes and this provides the reason for the schools to be linked in respect of paragraph 1.12 of the Code........However, there is no curriculum continuity argument since gaining priority under this criterion is dependent only on the secondary school attended by a sibling’ and this section of my complaint was upheld.

Whilst not relevant to the complaint, I sense that The Rochester Grammar is seeking to change its profile. It is certainly known as a school that is highly elitist and unforgiving to those who can’t keep up academically. The changed new admissions policy will still give priority to girls from four local primary schools and siblings of girls who have sisters at the school who qualified by passing the Medway Test at any level. The large majority of pupils will be girls who qualified with high scores in the Medway Test. It will be interesting to see how the former group fares but surely the school ethos will have to change, or those girls will have a difficult time.

You will find my report on the 2016-17 Ofsted performance  for primary schools here.

(A) Indicates Academy throughout the  section on individual schools, below.

One of the reasons standards are improving according to the Ofsted measure is the steady conversion of schools, especially weaker ones, to become academies. According to the rules this wipes out any past OFSTED outcome. It also leaves them free for Inspection for a further three years unless there are exceptional circumstances, as in the example below. 

There is a significant discrepancy in the outcomes for Kent. Whilst 10 academies improved against three declined, only seven Local Authority schools improved their assessment, whilst eight got worse.  

You will find a comprehensive list of Kent and Medway academies and those planning to convert or be sponsored here, and a list of Multi Academy Trusts here.

In 2016/17 KCC only considered Full inspections in their statistics, although this was less than half the total of schools. As a result their analysis was misleading and seriously under-reported the strong outcomes, as I pointed out at the time. I shall be interested to see the 2017/18 KCC presentation, due shortly. 

St Mary of Charity CofE (Aided)

Ofsted Outstanding July 2018 (excerpts): The headteacher provides outstanding and inspirational leadership for the school. All leaders, staff and governors share the vision and ambition to provide the best possible experiences for pupils. Expectations for all are uncompromising and very high. The school has improved dramatically since becoming an academy. All groups of pupils, including disadvantaged pupils, pupils who have special educational needs (SEN) and/or disabilities, and the most able pupils are very effectively supported to make strong progress from their starting points. Teaching and learning are outstanding. Pupils thrive at the school. Respect for and understanding of diversity in all its forms is promoted through the school values. Pupils‟ behaviour is exemplary. Pupils are friendly, polite and articulate, and develop as well rounded, interesting individuals. From starting points that are below and often well below those typical for their age when they start in the Reception Year, pupils make exceptionally strong progress throughout the school and achieve extremely well by the end of Year 6. St Mary of Charity was one of just three Kent schools in which KS2 Progress in all three elements was above average in 2016/17.  In 2014 the school was assessed as Inadequate, having Serious Weaknesses. Academisation has clearly worked in this case with Aquila, the Diocese of Canterbury Academy Trust, having turned the school round from its previous dire state.

Reculver CofE Primary

Ofsted Outstanding Jul 2018 - up from Special Measures in 2013 via Requires Improvement in 2014, after being taken over as an Academy by Aquila. ‘The Diocese of Canterbury Academies Trust (Aquila) provides very effective support, particularly in staff training.’  I recall parents contacting me back in 2013, queueing up to express concern about poor leadership in the school and the low standards in the school.

Hernhill Church of England Primary

Ofsted Outstanding October 2017 (Excerpt): ‘The headteacher’s ambitious vision of a well-rounded education, underpinned by Christian values, has caught the imagination of the whole community. There is a genuine sense of joy in learning at this school’.

The other Kent schools that have improved their assessment, all by one level were: Holy Trinity CofE, Dartford; King’s Farm, Rosherville CofE Academy (A) (up from Special Measures) and St Botolph’s CofE VA (A), Gravesham; Brunswick House, Mole Hill (A), South Borough (A), Sutton Valence & Wateringbury CofE, Maidstone; Dunton Green, Sevenoaks; Drapers Mills (A), Thanet.

Two Kent primary schools failed Ofsted, with Edenbridge Primary down from Good, and covered in a previous article. It has now been taken over as a Sponsored Academy by the Pioneer Academy Trust, which runs seven other primary academies in Bexley. Secondly there is Pilgrims Way Primary in Canterbury, found to have Serious Weaknesses, whose sorry tale can be found via the link. Pilgrims Way has been taken away from the Village Academy Trust as a result and rebrokered with Veritas Multi Academy Trust, one of a number of such decisions. 

Others to regress, from Good to Requires Improvement, were: Staplehurst, Weald; Nonington, Dover (has struggled with numbers amongst other issues for some years, with an average intake in single figures, but this year fallen to three offers in April for its 12 places. There is now an Interim Executive Headteacher in place); Platts Heath, Maidstone (another school that has struggled to maintain standards in the past); St Katharine’s, Snodland, Malling; Churchill, CofE & Hever CofE VC, both Sevenoaks; Dymchurch CofE, Shepway (Also with Village Academy Trust); Northdown, Margate (run by the poorly performing TKAT Trust).

Two new schools, both initially run by the disastrous Lilac Sky Academy Trust now defunct with enormous financial losses, are still suffering the consequences and both have been found to Require Improvement on their first inspection. The Report on Thistle Hill Academy (A) on the Isle of Sheppey begins: ‘Since first opening, the academy has not benefited from consistency in leadership and teaching. The quality of education provided, including pupils’ progress, has suffered as a result. However, more recently, decisive action by the current trust has brought stable and effective leadership, leading to evident improvement, some of which is rapid’. Martello Primary (full title) (A) has now fallen into the hands of the controversial Turner Schools Trust. The school is in Folkestone, a town compared on a training day to a 'rust-bucket American city', which is surely an insult to all local residents, including the families of pupils! The report considers that ‘The trust provides valuable assistance in supporting leaders’ work. The chief executive’s passion to ensure the highest standards at Martello Primary is palpable’ . I have no problem with her passion but too many of her profusion of ideas appear unrealistic, as demonstrated in my two articles.

Note: Several of the schools identified below are in a state of limbo as they were rebuilt under PFI and, although having applied to become academies cannot change whilst there are financial issues blocking this.

Four schools are unchanged on Requires Improvement: Astor College, Dover (covered previously and still not improved); Aylesford School (now managed by Wrotham School as a sponsored academy, at present blocked from becoming an academy by being a PFI school); Hartsdown Academy, Thanet (covered recently);  and  New Line Learning Academy, Maidstone (being re-brokered to a new Academy Trust, following poor performance along with Cornwallis Academy).

I have reported on Holmesdale’s dreadful decline from Good to Special Measures in February, previously. This decline was overseen by support from the controversial Brook Learning Trust, which has now pulled out of that support, with the Local Authority retaining responsibility. However, not surprisingly the Regional School Commissioner looked elsewhere for a sponsor to change it to an academy, Swale Academies Trust, who will be managing the school this term.   

However an Ofsted Monitoring Inspection in July reports further decline, a major embarrassment for KCC: ‘leaders and managers are not taking effective action towards the removal of special measures. Despite the headteacher’s clarity, honesty and commitment, overall the school’s progress since the previous inspection has been too slow. The primary reason for this is weak capacity in the leadership of the school at middle and senior leadership levels. In order to plug emerging gaps in leadership there have been successive changes to the areas for which leaders are responsible, and the headteacher has also taken on too many additional areas of responsibility. There are consequently omissions in leaders’ oversight of key areas. Weaknesses in capacity have also meant that some important first steps on the journey out of special measures have not been taken. Some new initiatives that had a promising start have now stalled’. The failed Governing Body was removed a month before the Inspection and replaced by an Interim Executive Body.

Royal Harbour Academy, not an academy, but a KCC school managed by the Coastal Academies Trust is, like Hartsdown Academy on a hiding to nothing. The school was created in 2015 by the amalgamation of the failed and closed, unlamented Marlowe Academy with its £30 million new buildings and the previously successful Ellington and Hereson School (itself an amalgamation of boys’ and girls’ schools). Like others its academisation is currently blocked by the PFI scandal affecting the Ellington site. Like Hartsdown Academy, it suffers from the pressure on places in Thanet with both schools being forced to accept large numbers of pupils who don’t wish to be there, along with a considerable proportion of transient children, refugees and others from abroad, many with poor English. The Report suggests there is too much acceptance of lower standards in spite of the valiant efforts of Coastal Academies Trust which manages the school, to improve expectations.

The two Chatham grammar schools have both had a rocky path to this good outcome. Chatham Grammar School for Girls was originally given a Short Inspection but, because of problems was given a second shot when the Good outcome was confirmed. If you follow my link you will find a profile of the school that describes a litany of issues; financial, academic and failure to both attract and retain pupils. It is now under the management of non-selective Brompton Academy, the other school in the University of Kent Academy Trust, and with a new headteacher appears to have turned the corner.  

The academic outcomes for Holcombe Grammar no doubt led to its Good Ofsted and it may well be the case that the Inspectors were not aware of its appallingly chaotic management detailed in a number of articles on this site (follow the link both backward and forward in time). The school is now led by the head of non-selective) Victory Academy, another school in the Thinking Schools Academy Trust (see below).

Victory itself has had a chequered history under its previous existence as Bishop of Rochester Academy, but has now clearly turned the corner, although its previous reputation drags down numbers.

The Hundred of Hoo Academy has a glowing Inspection Report, at odds with my previous view, influenced by very high numbers reported to be leaving to become Home Educated. I originally requested these from Medway Council in April 2017 and was eventually informed there were 54 in the year 2015-16. I challenged Medway Council on this and after a more than a year of delay and denial, they were finally ordered by the Information Commissioner to re-examine the data and reply within 35 days. This after they had ignored his initial request. The deadline expired last Tuesday and, having dragged it out to the last possible moment, informed me at 4.16 p.m. that the correct number was 18! (The Council has recently missed the deadline for the 2017-18 figures, so has clearly learned nothing) What a disgrace.

Walderslade Girls School has slipped from good to Requires Improvement, with the headteacher departing.  It has now been taken over by Greenacre Academy, the neighbouring boys school with whom it already has close links including a combined Sixth Form. Greenacre itself had a strong Ofsted in May.

The big disaster and disgrace is Medway UTC, about which I have previously written extensively in an article describing the background to its first Inspection. This resulted in a colossal failure at Special Measures, the Report pulling no punches. Basically, everyone appears to have failed the pupils who made the decision to transfer in at 14+ from their previous schools, most no doubt lured by the promise of a high tech curriculum and training: Medway Council; Governors and Trustees representing local business and higher education; school leaders (the Principal left at Christmas before the debacle was confirmed); many of the staff, although it is difficult to know which to blame as there was a very high turnover including presumably good people who left in disgust. I recommend you read the comments at the foot of my article to get a flavour of the sense of let-down by those caught up in this debacle.