|
Arguments against Temporary Academy places I am pleased to see that Jacqueline Steele and Liz Rayment-Pickard (Kids’ education will be suffer (sic), June 26th) of Wembley Park Academy, unlike Brent councillors, are willing to engage in debate about educational provision in the temporary Academy buildings. Normally at this time of the year, parents of children due to start reception class in September would have taken their child to an Open Day at the new school to familiarise them with the building, staff and children. As the Academy does not yet exist, except as a concept, they have been unable to do this. Indeed parents were not able to visit before making their school choice to find out about its atmosphere and ethos. The summer term Open Day visit gives 4 year olds reassurance and something to focus on during the long summer holiday. They will have met older children and seen them at work and will have a picture of the school in their minds ready for the big starting day. Academy reception pupils will be denied that security. Jacqueline Steele and Liz Rayment-Pickard emphasise their commitment to the highest standards of teaching and learning, and I would expect no less from fellow professionals. However there is room for debate about ARK’s approach to the curriculum, which puts ‘depth before breadth’ with four ‘short’ literacy classes and three ‘short’ numeracy classes every day. I am concerned about the ‘hidden’ curriculum as well as the taught curriculum. When children start school in reception they mix with older children in the playground, assembly and dining hall. They learn about school routines almost by osmosis, join in playground games and try to emulate the older children, who in turn are usually helpful and caring towards them. Older children model standards of work in class assemblies providing inspiration to the four year olds. At Wembley Academy, there will be NO older children to aid this essential socialisation into the community culture of the school. As the Academy will start with only two classes with their respective teachers and classroom assistants, plus the headteacher and a special needs assistant, children and teachers will not have the range of colleague support available at a normal 2-form entry school. I am sure the headteacher and executive principal will do their best to make up for the lack of such expertise, perhaps importing advisors from outside, but it does remove essential day-to-day support. The Council claims that parents support the Academy because 200 applied for 60 places when they were written to individually. This works out at 3.37 applications for each available reception place at the Academy but Anson Primary 3.47, Leopold 4.07, Malorees Infants 4.42, Donnington 4.70 and Park Lane (just up the road from the Academy) 6.2, all had a higher number of applications per place for September 2008 through the normal procedures. We could equally argue that this makes the case for community primary schools rather than academies. Martin Francis Brent Green Party Spokesman for Children, Families and Schools |
|
Letter published in |