| |
Our school has crossed no threshold of failure
• WE contest in the strongest terms the position of Haverstock School as stated in two recent articles (Pupils have excelled... but schools ‘must do better’, September 4, and ‘Our plan is to have a university partner for all secondary schools’, September 11).
In both articles your journalist Tom Foot suggests that Haverstock School is in danger of being transformed into an academy because of this summer’s GCSE results. Mr Foot, who has not to our knowledge ever visited the school or had any conversation with either of us in terms of Haverstock’s recent and significant improvement, is promoting a position that Haverstock is a failing school and at risk of becoming an academy. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Since 2001, Haverstock has made continuous and significant improvements. The number of students leaving with 5A*-C grades has moved from 21 per cent to 56 per cent at GCSE. Sixty per cent of A-level students gained A-C grades this year.
Compared with other schools using CVA (Contextual Value Added), Haverstock was the fourth highest performing school in Camden last year. Attendance has significantly improved and is above the borough average.
Haverstock is very popular, with long waiting lists in all year groups, and it is enjoying, in our view, a rapidly improving reputation in Camden.
This year our 5A*-C grades, including English and maths, did drop from 36 per cent to 32 per cent. We are disappointed with this but re-emphasise that 56 per cent of Year 11 gained five or more 5A*-C grades.
We had anticipated a score of 40 per cent of 5A*-C, including English and maths, and next year’s predicted grade is 45 per cent.
We agree with Councillor Andrew Mennear when he says that realistically there is bound to be variation from year to year.
We have looked carefully at this year’s results and have a very clear plan to ensure results come in close to next year’s prediction. We have also appealed a number of results and expect the final figure to be higher.
To take one measure of school performance in one year and to extrapolate from this to make a case for failure is crass and glib journalism. We have crossed no threshold of failure and have no intention of doing so.
Mr Foot writes: “Schools like Hampstead and Haverstock have until 2011 to improve GCSE results or be transformed into academies.”
We cannot speak for Hampstead but there has never been any suggestion that Haverstock is in any way a failing school and no instruction to improve performance has been issued.
Mr Foot’s statement is simply untrue.
We would like to invite Mr Foot to visit the school and see what we are really about and whether with a broader and more inclusive perception he would make the same assertions. We are certain he would not. We would also encourage readers to visit Haverstock during our open mornings and open evening in October to see the school for themselves.
We have made the significant progress described above because we are honest and focused in our work.
We are certain our improvement will continue and that our students will continue to thrive and benefit from being educated here.
JOHN DOWD
Headteacher,
Haverstock School
Jim Mulligan,
Chair of governors
EDITOR’S NOTE: To some extent the figures, undisputed by Haverstock School, speak for themselves. They show the school hovering above the line drawn up by education secretary Ed Balls. But, like so many figures used by the government to carve out policies, they only show part of the picture. We are aware that Haverstock School is striving – and successfully – to put itself on the map again after a fairly infertile period. We are aware, too, that teachers at schools in Camden are doing their best, often against the odds. If is felt we drew too negative a picture we apologise. This newspaper believes it is important – wherever possible – to support local schools.
|
 |
|
| |
