Bubbenhall Annexe Action Group

Bubbenhall Annexe Action Group

Key Points for Open Meeting

The following is a list of key points to be presented to the Governing Body at the Open Meeting on 24^th February 1999.

Reply to Consultation Paper

Quote 1

~it would be difficult to provide the learning opportunities to pupils referred to in Key Issues IV and V on a split site basis without providing ongoing additional resources for the school to address this.

Response 1

There has been no difficulty so far in providing these learning opportunities on a split site basis. This was never an issue before the OFSTED inspection.

Quote 2

The Authority's view is that there is evidence that pupils in mixed age classes perform at least as well as those in single age classes

Response 2

At least as well if not better! There is also no educational argument for having single age classes in KS1.

Quote3

~the argument for the closure of Bubbenhall is not one of achieving financial saving~

A smaller proportion of the school budget spent on premises costs (and so potentially a greater proportion of the budget spent more directly on supporting pupils learning)

If the annexe were to be closed, the associated LEA subsidies would cease. In these circumstances, while there would be a saving to the LEA, thus achieving the requirement of improved value for money ~ the effect on the school, at current levels would be at best cost neutral. At worst we would have to operate with a reduced budget

Response 3

Closing Bubbenhall Annexe will not produce a financial saving! It will produce a financial loss.

Greater 'value-for-money' to the LEA, A financial loss to the school of several thousand pounds. Where will cuts be made in the school budget, books, equipment? All children within the school will be worse off.

Quote 4

For the past two years we have received "special" one of payments but there is no guarantee that similar payments will be available in the future.

Response 4

The special one off payments were not intended to support the Annexe. The LEA paid them because the school has expanded from a first school into a primary school. They were intended for the purchase of new equipment for the new KS2 classes.

Quote 5

~they imply that any funding shortfall due to the formation of 3 single aged classes on the main site may attract additional support due to government initiative to hold KS1 classes to 30 or below.

Response 5

How does the school expect to receive this extra funding when it is not, and never has been, exceeding it's Standard Number of intakes into KS1. (28)

Quote 6a

If children currently at the Bubbenhall Annexe are reallocated to Ryton site, it should enable us to create 3 single age classes of around 22 pupils per class

Response 6a

It has been established that if the Annexe was closed, due to the issue of transporting infants on buses and the inaccessibility of the Ryton site, a number of parents would seriously consider transferring their children to more accessible schools in Leamington, Kenilworth, Warwick & Coventry. This could drastically reduce the number of Bubbenhall children transferring to Ryton and reduce the total numbers of Key Stage 1 pupils at Ryton from 66 to nearer 60.

When this happens, there will probably be two mixed age classes of 30 each. This will also produce a situation of potentially losing one Key Stage 1 teacher. How has this improved anything for Ryton or Bubbenhall children. Also the loss of pupils means the school loses yet more finance.

Quote 6b

This closure could take place in July 1999, in which case we would need to use a temporary classroom for one class.

Response 6b

As stated in Quote 6a, The school is aiming towards single age classes. Therefore any class occupying the Terrapin will consist of Ryton and Bubbenhall children. Because the building will not have its own toilet facilities, the pupils will be forced to go outside every time the toilet is required. Some progress! Would it be right to assume that the class forced to occupy the Terrapin would be the more responsible children in years 5 or 6?

Quote 7

The transporting of Key Stage 1 children is a sensitive issue etc ~

Response 7

During the previous school closure campaigns, the Ryton and Bubbenhall communities did not want their KS1 children transported by bus, as it is socially unacceptable. The result was a new split site school. Why do the Governors now think that it is acceptable to transport the Bubbenhall KS1 children on a bus?

The nursery children are all transported by car. Almost certainly the same will happen initially to the KS1 children. If this happens, some Bubbenhall parents may start to look at other primary schools near to, or on the route to, their place of work rather than do a 20 minute detour to Ryton. This will reduce the number of intake each year thus reducing the school finances further.

Further Points

The impact of the new houses being built at Ryton. There are going to be more than 200 family homes being built. Although guide line figures have been given, there is no way of telling how many primary school children will be moving in to these homes. Why close Bubbenhall annexe when within a year the school may be struggling for space. Yes, the builder may have to build an extra classroom, but space in all classrooms may be required not just one

Once the new homes are built, will Bubbenhall children have equal priority on entry to the school or will Ryton children take priority?

Bubbenhall Annexe is still classed as the village school by Bubbenhall residents. As such, they give generous support at Bubbenhall fetes, gala days etc. If the annexe closes this will mean a financial loss to the PTA funds.

A 49-seater coach at minimum will be required to transport Bubbenhall children to Ryton with or without 4 year olds. How is this bus going to get down Sodens Avenue at the busiest times and pull in to the lay-by? What do the residents of Sodens Avenue think of a 49-seater coach going down their narrow street twice a day? Who is going to meet the children off the bus and stop them wandering off or crossing the road? Infants and juniors finish at different times. Will the school supervise the infants for the 15 minutes until the juniors come out? Further resource!

Parents of both communities have worked very hard in forging links between Ryton and Bubbenhall, especially on the PTA. These links have already become strained because of a misleading and factually incorrect OFSTED report. Closure will effectively break these links.

Quote 9

Option 2 Benefits

Response 9

The list of benefits for option 1 is very concise and accurate but missing the above points. The list of benefits for option 2 is deliberately long and should read:

Equal access to all school facilities; e.g. SEN, library, hall, playing fields, after school care

Teaching staff and assistants time more efficient and easier to monitor

Simpler organisation to manage resulting in reduced administrative time

Fewer transition problems in year 3 (But more in reception?)

Greater opportunities for all children to socialise with all age groups.

Easier to address the other key issues for action raised by OFSTED

Improved liaison between all under fives and the Nursery - potential for developing an Early Years Unit (No guarantee)

Fewer security problems. (What about the Terrapin? This will increase the security issues.)

Greater likelihood of creating single age infant classes (Again no guarantee and no educational benefits by the LEA's own statement)