Mixed reaction for Oasis Academy Lord's Hill plans (From Daily Echo)

this needs to be block, we need more smaller schools. these super large schools dont work in the states to well. kids there leave school (uni) unable to name 10 capitals of the world, is that what you want here. also sports will suffer though lack of interschools games. and you end up with more kids putting on extra weight.

I gree with southy,
I live near the General Hospital and have a son that is starting upper school in september, he went to the old millbrook school for a taster day and hated it, akso we do not have transport to get him there and son has Autism, son's father lives in Wilton road so we thought it would be easier and better to get him into upper shirley high then he can go to his dads if he can't cope, another thing is when this new school is built near motoeway there is no public transport that will get him there, where he can get a no5 that will take him almost outside upper shirley high from near our home.

southy wrote:
this needs to be block, we need more smaller schools. these super large schools dont work in the states to well. kids there leave school (uni) unable to name 10 capitals of the world, is that what you want here. also sports will suffer though lack of interschools games. and you end up with more kids putting on extra weight.

tell that to the late Jeff Threlfall who was head of the mightily successful Wildern School. High attainment, 1800 pupils. Small schools are much harder to manage as you end up with large classes of unruly pupils as happened in places like Bellemoor, Millbrook, Oaklands etc. The larger the pupil roll the easier to effectively set and control behaviour.

Schools haven't taught capitals of the world since the 1970's, general knowledge needs to be taught at home

Condor Man wrote:

southy wrote: this needs to be block, we need more smaller schools. these super large schools dont work in the states to well. kids there leave school (uni) unable to name 10 capitals of the world, is that what you want here. also sports will suffer though lack of interschools games. and you end up with more kids putting on extra weight.

tell that to the late Jeff Threlfall who was head of the mightily successful Wildern School. High attainment, 1800 pupils. Small schools are much harder to manage as you end up with large classes of unruly pupils as happened in places like Bellemoor, Millbrook, Oaklands etc. The larger the pupil roll the easier to effectively set and control behaviour. Schools haven't taught capitals of the world since the 1970's, general knowledge needs to be taught at home

if discipline in nailed and management good-to-superb and catchment is average-to-good then it does not matter ( within reason ) how big a school is.... school size is only a problem with bad catchments/poor leadership/poor teaching/poor investment.
Oasis academy in priciple was a good idea , however it simply need strong management and decent buildings , not outstanding buildings , invest in the delivery of quality lessons and discipline and the kids could be taught in tents....

I had heard that the head of Cedar School knew nothing of the proposed development of the academy next to his school. That is a good bit of communication by the Rev Steve Chalks company Oasis.
If the plans go ahead that will use up most of one the only large green spaces in the Lordshill, Millbrook areas.
Besides the traffic issue along Nursling lane, which will no doubt increase due to Test Valley Borough Council agreeing to have more houses built down the bottom of the lane by the hotel.
What is going to happen to the Coastguard Agencies helicopter when it needs to land to transport a casualty to the general hospital, or is there going to be a heliport built up at the general somewhere.
The other down side is that by this new building being built there, what is going to happen to the teams of football, rugby, cricket and american football players they going to need to find somewhere else to go, or will the new school allow them to use the facilities, and charge them extortionate fees for doing so.
The last question that has to be asked is if this happens what happens to the land and communities facilities that are at Millbrook school and Oaklands School sites. Who owns them, does the council own them, or does Oasis own them?
Will they be sold off for housing to the local council, or to a private developer, and if so will our own city councillors who sit on the board declare an interest in any deal that happens?
Lastly this would be an ideal time for the present council to say that they cannot support theswimming pool at Oaklands so it will have to close, and the west of the City will again loose another public amenity.
All these things need to be answered by the board of governors of Oaklands before they get any planning permission. Bearing in mind that as an academy they are tottally outside of the LEA, and that they are in essence a business.

MGRA wrote:

Condor Man wrote:

southy wrote: this needs to be block, we need more smaller schools. these super large schools dont work in the states to well. kids there leave school (uni) unable to name 10 capitals of the world, is that what you want here. also sports will suffer though lack of interschools games. and you end up with more kids putting on extra weight.

tell that to the late Jeff Threlfall who was head of the mightily successful Wildern School. High attainment, 1800 pupils. Small schools are much harder to manage as you end up with large classes of unruly pupils as happened in places like Bellemoor, Millbrook, Oaklands etc. The larger the pupil roll the easier to effectively set and control behaviour. Schools haven't taught capitals of the world since the 1970's, general knowledge needs to be taught at home

if discipline in nailed and management good-to-superb and catchment is average-to-good then it does not matter ( within reason ) how big a school is.... school size is only a problem with bad catchments/poor leadership/poor teaching/poor investment.
Oasis academy in priciple was a good idea , however it simply need strong management and decent buildings , not outstanding buildings , invest in the delivery of quality lessons and discipline and the kids could be taught in tents....

tell me how many people took part in the olympic games or played for or took part in the national team or even a local city/town/country team of some sort or won that esso science prize at wildern school. wildern was not that good of a school. you take redbridge while i was there it won the esso science prize 3 times, it had an olympic swimmer, it won the athletics country championships 3 times, it won the basketball national cup 4 times, some of it kids white "O" level paperwork is now being taught in schools today for history and geography. and i know bellemoor and millbrook ( brownhill girls and greenlane boys school ) was no slouch also you had very good cricketer's and rugby and swimmers, chest payers and many other things coming out of those schools. mind you we was a butch of atheist and very fit also.
you start building those super large schools and you will lose all off that, because you will lose the competition between schools because there is less off them. only so many can take part in a interschool competition the majority will lose out, and the bigger the school the more that will lose out.

I went to the consultation.
Did not see any of the above people there.
I had an interesting chat with the people from Oasis and the contractor.
I am still not convinced that Oasis should not just be allowed to close and disperse those pupils to other schools where their influence will be diluted.
.
I won't comment on what people above have said about the field and the Cedar school as it's hogwash - the plans were very clear.
.
But it's £15 million quid we do not have for kids whose parents do not care.

Southy, Bitterne Park produced England international Darren Anderton, Half of Artful Dodger and TV nature expert Chris Packham. It was a big school with big success far beyond a few Esso medals and amatuer sportmen

if i was you i would take another look at what came out off those smaller schools a number of footballers pros and am, david wyath england and hampshire cricket, it had its share of actors to, sunhill bill later called the bill, rowers, its all been done and there is nothing special about wilden school. the bigger the school less chance for others.
like this oasis its going to replace 2 or 3 schools. look at like this football team 11 players, one school only 11 can take part, 2 schools thats 22 players taken part ect ect and you can go right the way though every single type of sport going.
your be moaning later that people and kids are fat

If the Council have got £15M to spend then cancel this project and share it around to all the other poorly maintained schools in the City. Oaklands is just 30 years old - the school featured in last nights was 70 years old and falling down! Where's the justice in this? This a Tory concieved plan and they are throwing money at it! Why dont they put up some temporary buildings at Oaklands to house the Millbrook pupils - this was the remedy at several other schools 2 years ago to solve the Secondary school adjustments.
In any event Oaklands will be big enough to house all the kids within 2 years as currently about 25% of kids in their catchment are turning their backs on the school and going to Romsey or Mountbatten Schools who have proven results over many years. This is despite high transport costs to parents.
The City have many 100's of pupils leaving the catchment daily to be educated in Hampshire schools - that speaks for itself!
Mend and make do at Oasis - thats what the rest of Southampton Schools have to do - why are they being treated differently than the rest?

secondary schools need to concentrate on as many kids leaving with manners , 5-8 GCSE including maths English and ICT , and interpersonal skills to equipe them to go onto further education. talk of what "stars" came from what schools in irrelevant. Wyvern and Wildern are large schools that are getting results and allowing their children the best chance from 16 onwards , whatever oasis is housed in , the main objective should be to help those who want to get on in life and to make it pretty clear to those who don't that in this bancrupt country , the scroungers they make use as role models have their days numbered.... this will a country of no free rides in the years ahead....

zoom-in wrote:
If the Council have got £15M to spend then cancel this project and share it around to all the other poorly maintained schools in the City. Oaklands is just 30 years old - the school featured in last nights was 70 years old and falling down! Where's the justice in this? This a Tory concieved plan and they are throwing money at it! Why dont they put up some temporary buildings at Oaklands to house the Millbrook pupils - this was the remedy at several other schools 2 years ago to solve the Secondary school adjustments.
In any event Oaklands will be big enough to house all the kids within 2 years as currently about 25% of kids in their catchment are turning their backs on the school and going to Romsey or Mountbatten Schools who have proven results over many years. This is despite high transport costs to parents.
The City have many 100's of pupils leaving the catchment daily to be educated in Hampshire schools - that speaks for itself!
Mend and make do at Oasis - thats what the rest of Southampton Schools have to do - why are they being treated differently than the rest?

You are quite right....they will put the £15m into the Oasis because they think its a Tory initiative.
.
One minute the state of the schools does not matter..its the teachers.....the next minute its £15m going into this and stuff every other school.......because they think its a Tory initiative

Lone Ranger wrote:

zoom-in wrote: If the Council have got £15M to spend then cancel this project and share it around to all the other poorly maintained schools in the City. Oaklands is just 30 years old - the school featured in last nights was 70 years old and falling down! Where's the justice in this? This a Tory concieved plan and they are throwing money at it! Why dont they put up some temporary buildings at Oaklands to house the Millbrook pupils - this was the remedy at several other schools 2 years ago to solve the Secondary school adjustments. In any event Oaklands will be big enough to house all the kids within 2 years as currently about 25% of kids in their catchment are turning their backs on the school and going to Romsey or Mountbatten Schools who have proven results over many years. This is despite high transport costs to parents. The City have many 100's of pupils leaving the catchment daily to be educated in Hampshire schools - that speaks for itself! Mend and make do at Oasis - thats what the rest of Southampton Schools have to do - why are they being treated differently than the rest?

You are quite right....they will put the £15m into the Oasis because they think its a Tory initiative. . One minute the state of the schools does not matter..its the teachers.....the next minute its £15m going into this and stuff every other school.......because they think its a Tory initiative

and all because your master put his eggs into the SET basket and because they are not a credible education provider they were rightly rejected. Had SET taken over the academies I think we'd be hearing a different tune.

dave1958 wrote:
I had heard that the head of Cedar School knew nothing of the proposed development of the academy next to his school. That is a good bit of communication by the Rev Steve Chalks company Oasis. If the plans go ahead that will use up most of one the only large green spaces in the Lordshill, Millbrook areas. Besides the traffic issue along Nursling lane, which will no doubt increase due to Test Valley Borough Council agreeing to have more houses built down the bottom of the lane by the hotel. What is going to happen to the Coastguard Agencies helicopter when it needs to land to transport a casualty to the general hospital, or is there going to be a heliport built up at the general somewhere. The other down side is that by this new building being built there, what is going to happen to the teams of football, rugby, cricket and american football players they going to need to find somewhere else to go, or will the new school allow them to use the facilities, and charge them extortionate fees for doing so. The last question that has to be asked is if this happens what happens to the land and communities facilities that are at Millbrook school and Oaklands School sites. Who owns them, does the council own them, or does Oasis own them? Will they be sold off for housing to the local council, or to a private developer, and if so will our own city councillors who sit on the board declare an interest in any deal that happens? Lastly this would be an ideal time for the present council to say that they cannot support theswimming pool at Oaklands so it will have to close, and the west of the City will again loose another public amenity. All these things need to be answered by the board of governors of Oaklands before they get any planning permission. Bearing in mind that as an academy they are tottally outside of the LEA, and that they are in essence a business.

Where did you get all this rubbish from???


Firstly, plans have been around and in the public domain since the start of the Secondary Review led by Clive Webster. These included potential builds on the Ordanance Survey site as well as on the 5 acres site. To suggest the Cedar School head knew nothing is risible, but if he really didn't then that says more about his awareness of the real world than anything else.

Looking at the plans, something like 20% of the 5 acres site will be used so once again your scaremongering and suggesting most of the space will be used up is ridiculous.

As for throwing in where the helicopter will land, well now you're going in to fantasy stuff. I'm sure it will be able to find another patch of land in the remaining 80% of 5 acres.

I can't even be bothered to address your other inane rants.

Condor man was top of my list for ridiculous posts, but you've managed to top even his risible efforts.

zoom-in wrote:
If the Council have got £15M to spend then cancel this project and share it around to all the other poorly maintained schools in the City. Oaklands is just 30 years old - the school featured in last nights was 70 years old and falling down! Where's the justice in this? This a Tory concieved plan and they are throwing money at it! Why dont they put up some temporary buildings at Oaklands to house the Millbrook pupils - this was the remedy at several other schools 2 years ago to solve the Secondary school adjustments. In any event Oaklands will be big enough to house all the kids within 2 years as currently about 25% of kids in their catchment are turning their backs on the school and going to Romsey or Mountbatten Schools who have proven results over many years. This is despite high transport costs to parents. The City have many 100's of pupils leaving the catchment daily to be educated in Hampshire schools - that speaks for itself! Mend and make do at Oasis - thats what the rest of Southampton Schools have to do - why are they being treated differently than the rest?

One of the main ethos of the secondary strategy launched by Webster a few years back (and supported by all local parties) was to address falling secondary pupil numbers in the City, of which a major cause was the loss of students to schools such as Mountbatten and Romsey on the west side of the City.

The strategy was a merger of two schools who were deemed not to be delivering the goods and reinvigorating them with a new sponsor along with state of the art facilities to attract those disappearing students.

From everything I have heard on the grapevine, the new sponsors are pushing up standards and will see massively improved results this year, but sadly they are up against it in securing the funding promised to them by Labour and the Conservatives prior to the election.

To turn some things around you need a real sea change and a defininf moment. The defining moment was to be a new build, so it will be extremely sad if the politicians cannot match the efforts of others in turning the City's schools around.

The Watcher wrote:

zoom-in wrote: If the Council have got £15M to spend then cancel this project and share it around to all the other poorly maintained schools in the City. Oaklands is just 30 years old - the school featured in last nights was 70 years old and falling down! Where's the justice in this? This a Tory concieved plan and they are throwing money at it! Why dont they put up some temporary buildings at Oaklands to house the Millbrook pupils - this was the remedy at several other schools 2 years ago to solve the Secondary school adjustments. In any event Oaklands will be big enough to house all the kids within 2 years as currently about 25% of kids in their catchment are turning their backs on the school and going to Romsey or Mountbatten Schools who have proven results over many years. This is despite high transport costs to parents. The City have many 100's of pupils leaving the catchment daily to be educated in Hampshire schools - that speaks for itself! Mend and make do at Oasis - thats what the rest of Southampton Schools have to do - why are they being treated differently than the rest?

One of the main ethos of the secondary strategy launched by Webster a few years back (and supported by all local parties) was to address falling secondary pupil numbers in the City, of which a major cause was the loss of students to schools such as Mountbatten and Romsey on the west side of the City. The strategy was a merger of two schools who were deemed not to be delivering the goods and reinvigorating them with a new sponsor along with state of the art facilities to attract those disappearing students. From everything I have heard on the grapevine, the new sponsors are pushing up standards and will see massively improved results this year, but sadly they are up against it in securing the funding promised to them by Labour and the Conservatives prior to the election. To turn some things around you need a real sea change and a defininf moment. The defining moment was to be a new build, so it will be extremely sad if the politicians cannot match the efforts of others in turning the City's schools around.

Haven't I been saying that for the past year on this site?

The Watcher wrote:

zoom-in wrote: If the Council have got £15M to spend then cancel this project and share it around to all the other poorly maintained schools in the City. Oaklands is just 30 years old - the school featured in last nights was 70 years old and falling down! Where's the justice in this? This a Tory concieved plan and they are throwing money at it! Why dont they put up some temporary buildings at Oaklands to house the Millbrook pupils - this was the remedy at several other schools 2 years ago to solve the Secondary school adjustments. In any event Oaklands will be big enough to house all the kids within 2 years as currently about 25% of kids in their catchment are turning their backs on the school and going to Romsey or Mountbatten Schools who have proven results over many years. This is despite high transport costs to parents. The City have many 100's of pupils leaving the catchment daily to be educated in Hampshire schools - that speaks for itself! Mend and make do at Oasis - thats what the rest of Southampton Schools have to do - why are they being treated differently than the rest?

One of the main ethos of the secondary strategy launched by Webster a few years back (and supported by all local parties) was to address falling secondary pupil numbers in the City, of which a major cause was the loss of students to schools such as Mountbatten and Romsey on the west side of the City. The strategy was a merger of two schools who were deemed not to be delivering the goods and reinvigorating them with a new sponsor along with state of the art facilities to attract those disappearing students. From everything I have heard on the grapevine, the new sponsors are pushing up standards and will see massively improved results this year, but sadly they are up against it in securing the funding promised to them by Labour and the Conservatives prior to the election. To turn some things around you need a real sea change and a defininf moment. The defining moment was to be a new build, so it will be extremely sad if the politicians cannot match the efforts of others in turning the City's schools around.

Haven't I been saying that for the past year on this site?

You have never said one of the defining moments was a new build to bring about a sea change, in fact you have been bleating on about how buildings play no part in the education of children and are unimportant.

Results can't fail to increase, Watcher. From what I've heard on the grapevine, city rules don't apply to academies! They just exclude the difficult kids at the drop of a hat and are left with only the manageable pupils! Guess where the excluded kids end up? In case you can't work it out, they go on managed moves to ordinary city schools. The balance is clearly tilted in favour of the academies in many ways as the council can't afford to let an academy fail.

zoom-in wrote:
Results can't fail to increase, Watcher. From what I've heard on the grapevine, city rules don't apply to academies! They just exclude the difficult kids at the drop of a hat and are left with only the manageable pupils! Guess where the excluded kids end up? In case you can't work it out, they go on managed moves to ordinary city schools. The balance is clearly tilted in favour of the academies in many ways as the council can't afford to let an academy fail.

Once again you're posting from a position of ignorance as Oasis were quite clear during the bidding rounds that they were all about inclusiveness (this fitted in with their Christian values) and were not in the business of exclusions (something which has been backed up by their record in the last two years - I know as a close friend is in the "education" sector of the City).

The real issue that has led to a tilting against the City's schools stems back to the move away from catchment areas and allowing parents a freedom of choice which meant schools such as Mountbatten creamed off the higher achieving and better behaved pupils leaving the City schools to deal with the "difficult" students.

Parental choice may have its upsides, but I'm not convinced people thought through the long term implications. All schools should have been made to raise their game, not allow others to cherry pick bright students and let others struggle.

Condor man must be a boozer.

He changes his opinion 3 times every day.

Or maybe he is a politician
IS THAT YOU MAGGIE?

Atpost wrote:
Condor man must be a boozer. He changes his opinion 3 times every day. Or maybe he is a politician IS THAT YOU MAGGIE?

as you all well know I like to provoke debate from a centre-right perspective. Anyone who knows anything about schools will know that the past 13 years have been a complete disaster. On paper schools might be able to justify improvements but we all know this is a smoke-screen. As a parent I want schools that will challenge and stimulate, not babysit. Yes, the buildings are not important it is the governance. Southampton LEA is not capable of running secondary education due to the social problems that blight many of the areas where comprehensive schools are located. It needs a fresh approach from people like Oasis.

Condor Man wrote:

Atpost wrote: Condor man must be a boozer. He changes his opinion 3 times every day. Or maybe he is a politician IS THAT YOU MAGGIE?

as you all well know I like to provoke debate from a centre-right perspective. Anyone who knows anything about schools will know that the past 13 years have been a complete disaster. On paper schools might be able to justify improvements but we all know this is a smoke-screen. As a parent I want schools that will challenge and stimulate, not babysit. Yes, the buildings are not important it is the governance. Southampton LEA is not capable of running secondary education due to the social problems that blight many of the areas where comprehensive schools are located. It needs a fresh approach from people like Oasis.

And a cornerstone of the fresh approach that Oasis put at the heart of their bid to run the two schools were state of the art buildings that would be very much seen as a defining moment in bringing about much needed change in the two communities.

One can only assume that you are in total disagreement with one of their fundamental pillars of turning communities around if you don't believe buildings make any difference.

Samuels was adamant in all his pieces in the City magazine that funding had been secured for the City's recuilding projects, backed up by Holmes, Gove as well as Cameron.

It would appear that my Party, at both a local and national level, have reneged on their promises. There may be a push to get the two Academies going, but one can never forget the broken promises to other decent schools in the City (e.g. Bitterne Park).

Condor Man wrote:

Atpost wrote:
Condor man must be a boozer. He changes his opinion 3 times every day. Or maybe he is a politician IS THAT YOU MAGGIE?

as you all well know I like to provoke debate from a centre-right perspective. Anyone who knows anything about schools will know that the past 13 years have been a complete disaster. On paper schools might be able to justify improvements but we all know this is a smoke-screen. As a parent I want schools that will challenge and stimulate, not babysit. Yes, the buildings are not important it is the governance. Southampton LEA is not capable of running secondary education due to the social problems that blight many of the areas where comprehensive schools are located. It needs a fresh approach from people like Oasis.

condor it was your beloved thatcher that screwed up schools. she was the one that started all the damage in the first place, like with action of removing the right for seniors school kids being able to take the "O" level, whitch in turn ment any one wanting to take the O level had to go on to collage and then on to uni before they could even think of taking it or it new equivalence.

Southy,
Not sure what you mean about going to college to take "O" Level?
It was what is now the GCSE
and the policy of having separate sixth forms is a Hampshire one - different Counties do it differently.
.
Oasis should be allowed to close.
In a couple of years most of the kids will have dispersed to other schools anyway.
.
Parental choice was thought up by boarding school educated twonks who did not know about life outside North London.
.
If new buildings are what is needed to get good results, how come most top fee paying schools are in Listed buildings?