|
|
 |
| |
Will kids be Christian enough to win places?
• I’M becoming frustrated at the way that “choice” and “need” are being used interchangeably in the debate around Camden’s new secondary school.
Clearly, there are many different perceptions of the word “need”. Is it really the case that some parents feel their choice of a Camden Church of England secondary school is more important than others’ genuine need for a place in any Camden secondary school at all?
Let’s be clear, our campaign for a new secondary school in the south of the borough is about chronic and long-standing under-provision, and the unmet need of the most disadvantaged children in Camden. The C of E school campaign is about choice.
Campaigners want a church secondary because that is what they would like to choose for their children, but the council’s stated policy is “Every Child Matters” – not every child can get into a church secondary.
Let’s not be naïve about this: unlike most church primaries, church secondaries are selective. Neither living next door to one nor stating your religion as Christian on the census entitles you to a place.
Those C of E secondaries that reflect the community do so by default, when they are undersubscribed by Christians. Most, however, are oversubscribed and that’s when the admissions policy really kicks in.
Grey Coat Hospital school in Westminster rejects children who have not clocked up five years weekly church attendance by the age of 10, with written proof of this from a priest.
St Marylebone, in Westminster, actually prioritises the congregation of St Marylebone Church over all other Christians. These schools are selecting one Christian child over another, never mind non-Christians, and why? Because they can.
If you complain about this to the Diocesan Board for Schools they will tell you: each school is in charge of its own admissions policy.
If the C of E runs the new Camden school, parent campaigners won’t be in charge.
They can hope for an open community admissions policy from the church, but the best the church has offered so far is 50 per cent community admissions, reserving 50 per cent of the places for Christians, regardless of which borough they live in.
Even if the school does get built at Adelaide Road, it is perfectly possible that children living in the north-west of the borough would still not be able to get into it – and we are told the whole point of building a new school in Camden is to provide additional places for children who can’t currently access them.
What we all need is an inclusive, ambitious, well-funded school with a moral and spiritual ethos, full of excellent teachers and happy pupils – and we can have all that and more in a community school run by Camden.
Campaigners, don’t give your parent power away to the church. You may find that, when it comes to admissions, your children are not “Christian” enough to matter.
POLLY SHIELDS
Millman Street, WC1
• I WAS alarmed at the council’s stance on an open competition for the new secondary school at the recent Building Schools for the Future meetings.
I secured my current position through an open job interview, companies routinely secure work through open tenders (especially from public bodies) and we elect our councillors through open elections. The Tories even selected their parliamentary candidate through an open primary, claiming to be more democratic.
All are various forms of competition, so why is the council so reluctant to endorse it as the selection process for the new school? I fear the decision has already been made and the consultation was a sham. Camden deserves better.
MATT COOK
(Address supplied)
• I ATTENDED the meeting to discuss the new secondary school last Tuesday, which I understand took a far more constructive direction than the one the previous Monday.
It would seem the council has a huge task on its hands in hoping to put forward a collective vision to the Department for Education. First, because of the suggested location – not only because of the potential upset it may cause at Frank Barnes and Jack Taylor schools, but also because of the attempt to satisfy so many different needs in the area. Kilburn has the worst intake anywhere and parents in Hampstead feel there is no proper choice. It may be they are hoping to solve too many problems with one dream solution.
Second, the question of the sort of school you would like your child to attend can only raise emotive, strong, personal feelings. So, to start the campaign with an open question like that leaves a huge distance to try to recover, before hoping to put forward any collective vision.
The other, very strong, issue which came up many times during the meeting was the question of whether the new school should be Church of England.
Parents cannot pretend they don’t have anxieties. They are realistically concerned about knives in school, gang warfare and a general lack of respect and motivation. It is on this point they feel reassured by the track record of Church of England schools.
Church of England schools are not the only ones built on moral values and strong guidance, but, in the absence of any other reassuring option, they would seem to be the most dependable, and realistic, ones available.
The Church of England’s track record in governing schools speaks for itself, as do the academic results. Community or comprehensive schools do not.
Perhaps, instead of trying to convince everyone why a Church of England school would be a good and secure option, its non-supporters should be called on to prove why it’s not?
LYNENETTE KTME
Elsworthy Road, NW3
• I HAVE pressed the council on several occasions to issue a guarantee that the future of Frank Barnes School for Deaf Children will be safeguarded. It is threatened by the proposed construction of a new secondary school on the site it occupies in Swiss Cottage. The council merely replied that it will do its best.
That is not good enough for all of us many friends of Frank Barnes. Frank Barnes is a national centre of excellence for deaf children, and we are all very proud of it in Camden.
Let’s all come together and request a guarantee from the council on the future of this wonderful resource.
LUCA SALICE
Chair of governors, Torriano Junior School
• IF consultation is to mean anything, then councillors Andrew Mennear and Chris Bryant should not persist in trying to squeeze a large new secondary school onto the Swiss Cottage site, cruelly evicting the excellent Frank Barnes School for Deaf Children in the process.
The message has come out loud and clear from the recent consultation meetings on the Camden Building Schools for the Future proposals that Swiss Cottage is wholly inappropriate for a secondary school. The need is greatest for a new school in the south of the borough, where the most deprived children are currently being disgracefully overlooked.
There is a universal call for the new school to be comprehensive, totally inclusive and democratically accountable, which means it should be a Camden-run community school open to everyone, including adults at evenings and weekends. An academy or church school would naturally be selective.
Cllrs Mennear and Bryant should take on board what everyone is saying and look more closely at alternative sites – Mount Pleasant and Gray’s Inn Road – and re-negotiate a better deal with developer Argent for more money (the £1 million offered is peanuts) or even some land on the King’s Cross site for a new community school.
KATHARINE BLIGH
Priory Road, NW6
|
 |
|
| |
|
|
|
