There was a much larger group of parents (about 50) at Kings International this evening for the Parents Forum. Adverts for the meeting handed out by a concerned parent attracted a much higher attendance than usual to ask Kings about how it was going to combat the risk it was under and its plans to become an academy.
The meeting started with a announcement by Mr Ryles that this was an opportunity to hear about the progress at Kings and to ask questions. He was concerned that the leaflets were advertising a different agenda, and academies were not something he would be making a presenting about but he would answer questions if he could.
Mr Cooksey covered the progress at Kings including the improved BTEC results and the impressive parental survey results. He hopes this will enable Kings to have a full section 5 Ofsted inspection in the next two weeks, and leave special measures.
Questions were then invited.
Mr Ryles was asked about the marketing that Kings was going to do in the three school-weeks before feeder school parents would start their selection of secondary school.
Mr Ryles introduced Judith Langley, the new head of school at Kings. Judith was very enthusiastic and explained that she would be putting together a team next week to plan the marketing of Kings, which would include feeder school visits and possibvly performances or exhibitions of student work. Schools in Hampshire would also be involved in some way. Parents at the meeting were encouraged to spread the word about Kings amoungst the community to counter the bad press it has had recently.
[note: KeepKings would be very happy to use our resources to coordinate our promotion of Kings as “a strong, independent and successful choice of school for local parents” with the marketing plans being developed by the college]
72 families had completed their induction on 6th July.
Mr Ryles said that Kings did not need the 120 new joiners stated by Surrey County Council (SCC) to be viable, but could operate with 100, which he hoped would be recruited in the autumn.
Mr Ryles was asked how the school could be marketed when we don’t know that it will exist because of the doubt raised by SCC saying they will “revisit the situation” next Autumn.
Mr Ryles said he didn’t know about the SCC statement and several parents told him about the radio interviews given by PJ Wilkinson on BBC Radio Surrey and the confirmation letter SCC had sent (see the blogspot) of that situation.
A question was asked by a parent about why SCC had told a prospective parent that Kings was not taking any further admissions in September 2011. The parent was asked to confirm the details so Mr Ryles could investigate.
A question was asked about the recent reorganisation proposal. 18 months ago SCC had suggested an academy for Kings and it seems that Mr Ryles indicated at the time he would only work with Kings if it was “taken over” by Tomlinscote. Now this was not going to happen, would the school now hold an open and frank discussion of the academy option. (some debate ensued about the source and accuracy of the information)
Mr Ryles said that the IEB (The Interim Executive Board is made up of four “advanced governors” appointed by SCC and the executive head, Mr Ryles, and operates as the governing body of the college) did not have the legal powers to explore academy conversion, only Surrey County Council did.
Mr Ryles could not indicate who in SCC could do this. (some debate about powers of the IEB to engage with parents in discussion about academies ensued)
Mr Ryles was asked to confirm that students would not be moved to Tomlinscote for their final year, and he confirmed they would stay at Kings to complete their courses.
Some further were asked by some parents to individual IEB members and Shadow Governors afterwards where, both expressed that they didn’t have the authority to become involved in exploration of the academy option.
The parents were asked by the college to take their requests to Surrey County Council.
In another discussion with parents and Mr Ryles at the end of the meeting the possibility of having an academy briefing by parents in the school hall was suggested.
Initially it seemed this would not be possible because parents could not be informed of it by “ParentMail” but Mr Ryles said it “might be possible” after it emerged that ParentMail has been used for other purposes such as commercial tutoring services and county council proposals.
[note: KeepKings would be happy to organise an academy briefing at the college for Kings parents.]
The meeting closed so that some parents and some IEB members could attend another student event.
KeepKings.org 