Last mature tree on Wemb!ey High Road butchered

Secrecy and murk cloud Ark Elvin planning application

A resident asks on the Brent Planning Portal whether the frontage of the new Ark Elvin school building will be as in the artist's sketch above, which is on the documentation to be considered.

The short answer appears to be 'no' if one refers to the Wembley Area Action Plan:

W5 Copland School and Brent House

(4 hectares)

Mixed use development on the High Road frontage with new / rebuilt school to the rear.

The ground floor on the High Road frontage should be commercial retail development with associated car parking.  Residential development either above or adjacent to the retail should include a high proportion of family housing.

Development of the school to the rear of the site should accommodate, if possible, an additional form of entry on current capacity.

The scale of new development near to Cecil Avenue should respect the adjacent suburban character.

Car parking on the retail site should have shared use for town centre parking. There should be an active retail frontage with servicing off Wembley High Road. Access from Cecil Avenue will be limited to residential access only.

In the event of the school not coming forward as part of a joint scheme, proposals may be brought forward for the Brent House site as a standalone development.

This seems to be yet more misleading information.  The frontage is likely to be occupied by housing and shops. The reason why access  to the building site through the Brent House site (high rise on the High Road, top centre) is that the Council does not want to disrupt the disposal and regeneration of  its property.

Meanwhile it is worth looking back at the discussion atwhat  was then the Brent Executive when the proposals came up for discussion. Muhammed Butt declared an interest as the parent of a child at what was then Copland but soon to be Ark, and not as a governor which he is now.

Jean Roberts, speaking for teachers at Copland and local residents  opposed the land transfer: (Extract from Minutes)

With the consent of the Executive, Jean Roberts representing teachers of Copland Community School and residents, addressed the meeting and spoke against proposals to expand the school on to adjacent land involving a land transfer. She referred to the terms of title deeds, covenants and Rights of Way which could prohibit the scheme and also the intention to grant a 125 year lease on the final school site to ARK Schools (ARK) to whom the school was due to transfer as a sponsored academy on 1 September 2014. Seamus Sheridan also addressed the meeting and expressed concern over the lack of proper consultation over the proposals and restrictions on speaking rights at a public meeting. He stated that children and residents were against the expansion proposals which would result in a loss of land used for play.

Rights of Way was raised at this early stage and although Fiona Alderman has ruled the application can go ahead with the Rights of Way being dealt with separately it is mentioned in the Application.

Demolition of existing buildings on site and erection of replacement building to

accommodate a three storey 9FE secondary school for 1750 pupils (1350 11-16 year

old and 400 post 16) with associated car parking, servicing and circulation space, Multi

Use Games Area, All Weather Pitch, games areas and other hard and soft landscaping,

together with the diversion of Public Right of Way (PROW) No.87

 Public Right of Way to be realigned to border the eastern end of the MUGA and widened to 3.4m (currently it separates the school building from the playing fields)

It seems strange that the POW forms part of the application but cannot be admitted as a material planning consideration.

At the Executive Meeting many reports were withheld from public scrutiny and designated as 'restricted' LINK

Although Wembley Central and Tokyngton ward councillors made no comments at the consultation stage I understand that two Wembley Central councillors are down to speak tonight. Muhammed Butt (sorry that name keeps popping up) is a Tokyngton ward councillor.

Currently the land is on a short-term lease from Brent Council to Ark but on completion of the new build would be handed over to them on a 125 year agreement.

Ark Elvin 'land grab' to be decided at Planning Committee on Thursday

From the planning application

The redevelopment of the Ark Elvin school site (formerly Copland) is coming up at Brent Planning Committee on Thursday October 22nd (7pm Brent Civic Centre) LINK

Residents have been up in arms about what they see as a 'land grab' of the school playing fields to which they have had access for decades. The issue has been covered on Wembley Matters in the past LINK and there is an update on the Kilburn Times website LINK

Local resident Chetan Patel is claiming that the plans are a breach of the 'Public Right of Way':

With respect to planning application (ref 13/3161) for the redevelopment of ARK Elvin Academy formally known as Copland, I believe the proposal breaches the community's 'Public Right Of Way' to access the park in accordance to Highways Act 1980 Section 130A.

The proposed re-development removes all general public access to the park. The community has had access to the entire park without any objections from ARK or from the previous management of Copland Community School for many decades now. The Planning Application removes this general public access to the park.

The school have claimed anyone entering the park are trespassers, and the public don't have authorised access to park. However, the law assumes that if the public use a path/park without interference for some period of time set by statute at 20 years, then the owner (London Borough of Brent) had intended to dedicate it as a right of way. Therefore it is a 'Public Right of Way' by way of 'easement by prescription'.

 Residents appealed to Muhammed Butt, Brent Council leader when he visited the site on Saturday. However Butt is both a member of the governing body of Ark Elvin (representing the local authority), which put the proposal forward and a member of the Cabinet who gave the nod to the plans.

The Planning Committee is statutorily independent of the Council and under Sarah Marquis' has shown some independence.

The issue does of course raise the much wider issue of the handing over of public assets to academy chains.

At the same meeting the planning application for the Kensal Rise Library building is also under consideration. LINK

Copland: Did Premature Ejaculation Rule Out Final Ofsted Visit?

Guest blog by ‘Pamela Stephenson-Connolly’

For those who like closure in their stories these are frustrating times. With only 2 weeks of the school year left it has been announced that, due to illness, Copland’s final Ofsted inspection visit will not now take place. This will mean that the HMI’s  written report of the visit may have to be put back on the shelf for a while. This is quite unnecessary, however, as the 3 reports published after earlier visits this year indicated that the actual inspections had little influence on the final reports,  the content and assertions of which were overwhelmingly determined by the DfE/Ofsted’s pre-written narrative of which the reports simply formed a  part. LINK to http://wembleymatters.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/copland-is-getting-goves-reverse-trojan_11.html 

The nature of the narrative arc was set in the first Ofsted report this year (‘the interim headteacher and associate headteacher and very strong governance of the IEB are driving change well’) and it soon became clear that the reports’ principle purpose was to portray  the ‘saving’ of a school by Gove, his ‘useful idiots’ Pavey, Marshall, John, Price and the rest of the IEB, through  forced academisation, ‘tough’ but necessary action, (60 staff and half the curriculum axed), and finally the salvation that would be The Ark Rescue (and thence onward ultimately to privatisation). The report on the final inspection, now postponed, would have provided the climactic instalment.

There are some, however, who are sceptical about the official reasons given for the cancellation of the inspection and support their case by reference to the tone of fevered over-excitement in the last report in March  ( ‘We can see hope now.’ This new-found optimism is palpable!’ etc). These sceptics contend that this March report in fact read more like the climax (‘richer quality of learning…yes!…rigour…yes!…challenge…yes!…more this, more that…...yes yes!…  more rigour still….   yes yes!….best practice…yes yes yes!………..cutting edge……more more more! …….yes yes yes! …ooooohhh ……’ etc)   and that the inspectors reached this climax too early. In a kind of Ofsted premature ejaculation they came too soon to what they should have delayed until later, ie the final triumphant inspection report written to justify the whole year’s evisceration of the school, its curriculum, its staff and its soul. The inability to defer gratification left Ofsted with nothing left in the tank for the final report, hence the cancellation.

The rumour surrounding this theory now joins a litany of other half-believed stories which have circulated in recent months at the school. Here’s a sample.

Rumour 1.    Subject: No Ofsted Inspection (Alternative explanation 1)

According to this one, after the Trojan Horse fiasco, nobody believes Ofsted anymore and Copland’s new owners, Ark,  didn’t want their new property tainted by association. Ark wide-boy and Tory party contributor Lord Fink had a word with Cameron who told Gove, ‘No inspection or I’ll unleash Theresa May on you and you stay on the naughty step for another month’.   ‘Sorted, Dave’, was apparently Gove’s reply.

Rumour 2.     Subject: New School House Names

Apparently, the Ark functionary who decided to impose the name Harold M.Elvin Academy on the new school is determined to continue this theme in other areas. Accordingly, the new school house names are to be similarly influenced by stars of 1970s Philly Soul and will be called

Delphonics, Stylistics, O’Jays, Spinners, Trammps, Sweet Sensations

Plans to change the boys’ school uniform to wide-lapelled velvet jackets, flares and platform shoes with contrast laces and to adopt ‘Betcha By Golly Wow’ as the school motto were considered a step too far, however.  

 (The proposal for ‘Backstabbers’ to be the Leadership Team Motivational Song for the new Ark era was nevertheless accepted unanimously).

Rumour 3.   Subject: No Ofsted Inspection (Alternative Explanation 2) 

 

This rumour claimed that the final Ofsted inspection would, in fact, still take place and it would be on Thursday 10^th July when almost all the staff would be on strike and the school would be closed to students. An inspection of an empty school would achieve 2 objectives. Firstly, the incidence of pupil misbehaviour would be substantially less. (The March Ofsted report’s claims that ‘behaviour is much improved and the school is a more respectful place…’  were laughed at by staff who know the reality. ‘The worst it’s ever been’ was what I was told by one experienced teacher in a position to know and with no axe to grind. Hardly surprising when support staff, student supervisors and an entire mentoring department have been scrapped this year and the remaining hard-pressed staff regularly receive messages asking them to help out ‘as we are rather understaffed today’. No kidding!).

The second reason to visit on a strike day would be so that the HMI could see at first hand one great growth area at Copland which is a direct result of the IEB/Marshall regime. Up until last September Copland’s annual loss of teaching days through strike action averaged less than 1 day per year. This year, since the imposition of IEB/Marshall, that figure has improved by about 800% year on year. Having shot their bolt over teaching and learning standards in the March report, Ofsted could have at last begun to retumesce on this one great sign of progress. ( ‘We can see solidarity now. The new-found disillusionment and militancy is palpable!’). It would have made enjoyable reading.

Copland will close next Wednesday and that’s not a rumour. None of the staff forced out over the last year have received any kind of recognition from IEB/Marshall: no leaving ceremonies, no presentations, no collections, no leaving speeches, no spoken thanks, no written communications of gratitude for their contribution. Nothing. Instead, those taking ‘voluntary’ redundancy have received a letter which begins with the sensitive formulation: ‘I write to confirm your dismissal from the services of the school on the grounds of redundancy’.

In a way this is a fitting end to a decline which began with Ofsted failing Alan Davies’s Copland on Safeguarding. (Failing to safeguard the students, that is, not the public funds in the school budget. Ofsted had been quite happy with Davies/Evans/Patel’s financial management of the school, as had Brent Council. It was the staff who blew the whistle on the £2.7 million scam and the staff who suffered the consequences: a series of clueless appointments at senior management level (with new managers primed by Brent to regard the staff as ‘the problem’), and a refusal by Brent either to pursue the missing money or to balance this refusal by acknowledging its responsibility for the resulting budget deficit).

So it goes. For the moment, the city boys, the privatisers, the self-seeking ‘non-political’ careerists and the bullshitters are in the ascendancy. Schools as exam-grade factories will dominate for a while. But they’re only a manifestation of a particular point on the greater narrative arc of our society. If Copland’s teachers have achieved anything in the school’s varied and mostly honourable history it will have been to have helped produce kids who will grow into adults who will appreciate the limitations of this essentially sterile ‘vision’ and  come together to do something positive to change it. 

I wonder where that would feature in an Ofsted inspector’s checklist of teacher achievements.

COPLAND IS GETTING GOVE’S ‘REVERSE -TROJAN -HORSE’ TREATMENT

-->

Guest blog by Will Shaw

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the case, the bizarre events surrounding the Birmingham ‘Trojan Horse’ schools should have finally made clear that Ofsted exists to give the government the inspection reports it requires to support whatever its  schools strategy happens to be at any particular time. If the inspectors don’t come up with the right report they can be sent back into schools until they do. This is not usually necessary as the inspectors know what is expected of them and they dutifully supply it. Their lack of integrity or principled independence of thought can be measured by their deafening silence in objecting to this role over the years  and the extreme rarity of any individual resignations.

Ofsted inspections are a key weapon in the government’s overriding aim of ultimately turning  all (state) schools into centrally-run academies and  taking them out of local democratic accountability.  Once Ofsted supplies the government with the ‘appropriate’ inspection report on a school, the next stage is special measures, the imposition from outside of a non-accountable IEB  and forced academisation. This is the stage Copland has been at since last September. 

Obviously, this stage in the process has to appear  to be both necessary and beneficial and it’s Ofsted again which is used to show how much schools like Copland  improve as a result of the government’s wise policies. At Copland, if the inspectors are to be believed, the beneficial results of government policy were almost instantaneous. Their report after last November’s visit spoke of  the school having ‘turned a corner’ and ‘students making better progress’. It continued ‘ teaching …..attendance and punctuality are improving’, ‘students are keen to learn’, ‘ there has been a sea-change in the pace of improvement’, ‘the interim headteacher and associate headteacher and very strong governance of the IEB are driving this change well’ and so on; and all this after only 6 weeks! The nature of the narrative had been set. 

March 2014’s Copland report took the hagiography to the next level:  ‘… the  headteacher of St Paul’s Way is an astute Chair of the Interim Executive Board….. IEB members are asking the right questions about the school’s performance.. balanced in the rigour of challenge and in the quality of their support. Senior leaders are ‘stepping up to the plate’ more …. having greater impact on the work of the school ……... responding well to the high level of challenge being laid down by school leaders and the IEB... ……more accurate understanding of students’ needs  ……..higher expectations for students……  behaviour is much improved and the school is a more respectful place…… zero tolerance to poor behaviour … ….. an attitude of respect between and among students and staff……more confident and articulate learners. …….a richer quality of teaching…..teaching is better… lessons are more structured’. Clearly carried away with the spirit of the thing, the reporting inspector at one point came over all Mills and Boon and, revealing  a bureaucrat’s tin ear for the speech patterns of 21^st century London youth,   wrote this:

 ‘One student, capturing the views of many, said, ‘We can see hope now.’ This new-found optimism is palpable’.  

 (I like to imagine the inspector considering whether to  attribute the final 6 words to this ‘student’ as well, but wisely deciding that this might be pushing it a bit). 

It’s difficult not to laugh (if only at the writers’ belief that they could get away with this tosh) but many teachers and pupils have worked very hard at Copland this year and it’s a pity that any truth which these Ofsted reports might contain is tarnished by the relentless gung-ho bollocks  of the rest of it. But then, establishing  the truth is not at all what these inspections are about. How could they be when 2 inspectors come in for a day and a half and watch 10 or 15 minutes of a few lessons?  No, as in Birmingham their function is to provide bogus supporting evidence for actions already decided on. In the case of Copland, we are being provided with the  narrative of the ‘saving’ of a school by Gove, forced academisation, ‘tough’ but necessary action, (60 staff and half the curriculum axed), and finally the salvation that is The Ark Rescue.  

It’s a satisfying narrative  so far and it will be interesting to see how far the Ofsted inspectors think they can push it when the report on their imminent final visit comes out in a few weeks time.  As the purpose of the report is pre-determined and as the inspectors know what is expected of them (and  also know that their continuing employment depends on their coming up with the goods), the report  might as well have been written last September. If it was, I hope they don’t change anything if they , by chance, should come across this blog. And if they’re looking for further fictional inspiration, what better place than in the sort of book that, if he’d ever read it, Michael Gove would surely have banned, if only for the fact that it isn’t even really a decent, proper, stout English novel but rather some thin, poncey, foreign-sounding thing called a ‘novella’: Animal Farm.

“It has become usual in Wembley to give Mr Gove, Michael Pavey, the IEB, the Interim Headteacher and the Associate Headteacher  the credit for every successful achievement and every stroke of good fortune at the school. You will often hear one pupil remark to another, “Under the guidance of our Senior Leadership Team  I have progressed  five levels in six months” or two teachers, enjoying a drink at the staffroom water-cooler, will exclaim, “thanks to the leadership of Headteacher  Marshall and  Associate Headteacher John, how excellent this water tastes!”...” (With apologies to  George Orwell).

The next Copland Ofsted visit is ‘imminent’  and the inspector’s report will be published in a few week’s time. But please remember, and thanks to Martin, you read it here first.

Gladstone Free School pupils advised to find places elsewhere for September

The Brent and Kilburn Times LINK is reporting that Paul Phillips, Principal designate,  is advising parents whose children were due to attend Gladstone Free School in September 2014 to find a place elsewhere. The school has not yet secured a site or a building. 120 Year 6 children currently in primary school are affected. Sara Williams, Director of Children and Families assured the BKT that places were available elsewhere. These are likely to be at Copland or Crest Academy. Brent Council has not control over free schools or their site arrangements but they do have overall responsibility for the well-being of Brent's children.

I raised the issue of Year 7 places in proposed free schools in my letter to the Brent and Kilburn Times on September 10th. There is no further news about a building for Gateway Academy which was also due to open to 100 or so Year 7 pupils in September.

Brent Executive approves Copland land deal and landlord licensing

An unusually garralous Brent Council Executive last night approved the land deal which will see the Copland Community School site and neighouring land handed over to Ark Academy for 125 years. A new secondary school with an additional form of entry will be built away from the High Road (exact position not yet fixed) and nearby Elsley Primary School will double in size.

The Executive set aside issues around development restrictions on the site (although a restrictive covenant caused considerable problems for the Preston Manor expansion) and shrugged off threats of a judicial review from teacher unions.

Jean Roberts, speaking for the tecaher orgabisations, said that they had spoken to local residents in nearby streets who were overwhelmingly against the scheme and concerned about the impact on them as well as rights of way on the school grounds. Local children were playing on the grounds as they spoke to residents who told her that they were starting a petition against the scheme.

Although at pains to stress that this was about a land deal and nothing to do with forced academisation and an Ark takeover of state schools, Executive members nonetheless took the opportunity to attack the former management of the school and the quality of teachers - forgetting perhaps that they had oversight of the school at the time.

The Executive went on to approve an 'Additional'  licensing scheme for landlords in Brent but deferred a decision on 'Selective Licensing' in Wembley Central, Harlesden and Willesden Green.

There will be further consulation over a two month period about what other wards, namely Dudden Hill and Mapesbury, should be included in the Additional Licensing scheme.

The Additional Licensing scheme charge will be set at £550 for the 5 year licensing period. Challenged that this would be passed on to tenants, Muhammed Butt said that landlords would be able to claim it back as part of their business costs.

Margaret McLennan said that the scheme was not about gentrification but bringing private rented properties up to the bare minimum regarding matters like gas safety checks. She said that the scheme would also protect good landlords from bad tenants.

Enforcement will begin in January 2015. The Executive did not discuss the vexed question of potential unintended consequences if landlords evict tenants in order to deal with overcrowding or unsafe premises.

SIR ARTHUR ELVIN, INSPIRATION FOR COPLAND’S NEW NAME, GIVES ARK FOUNDERS SOMETHING TO ASPIRE TO

Guestblog from Neonymph

Last week staff at Copland received a message from the proposed new Head saying that she, with a group of students and staff,  ‘together’ had chosen the new school’s name. (This did seem a little premature to some as Mr Gove has apparently not yet signed the Funding Agreement for the school).  Still, it was refreshing to see that, in choosing a new name,  Ark had put its bad old sham ‘consultation’ days behind it and had involved all the stakeholders in the decision-making process. And the extent of that culture-change should not be underestimated. Only a few weeks have passed since Ark’s control-freak nature was revealed in its decision to entrust the running of the new school only to a current employee of Ark working alongside another current employee of Ark who is a product of Ark’s own  Future Leaders processing  system. 

                                                                                                       So letting the staff and students choose the new school name without any guidance from Ark signals a sea-change comparable to McDonalds suddenly allowing its employees to ignore all they were taught at Burger Academy and to start flipping their patties any old way they fancy. (And if  any cynics out there are still sceptical about how democratically the chosen name was arrived at, the words ‘students and staff’ are employed 4 times in the message, along with ‘unanimous’, ‘we’ and ‘together’ in order to set their minds at rest).                                                                                                                                                                        There’s hope for the future too in the aspirational nature of the name Ark have selected. For Sir Arthur Elvin was a man who came from nothing, came to Wembley as an outsider, built up the old Twin Towers stadium, gave jobs to the unemployed, allowed the community to use the athletics, swimming and ice-skating facilities of the Wembley complex, got his hands dirty with his workers picking up litter after an afternoon event in the stadium in readiness for an evening fixture, treated his employees in exemplary fashion and, according to local historians, had their almost universal  respect and affection.  Anyone looking for an aspirational figure would agree that there’s lots here for Ark’s managers, and particularly the hedge fund fat cats, millionaire Tory party donors  and Boris Johnson bankrollers who own it,  to aspire to. (As well as the kids of course).  

                                                 And the names that didn’t make the cut?:  well, The Bob Crow Ark was never really a starter and the long list of names suggested  by Wembley Matters readers here  LINK

probably  wouldn’t have survived the democratic scrutiny of ‘students and staff’ either.       

           Next meeting ‘we’ decide on Ark’s new ‘Ark Elvin Academy’ logo   ‘incorporating some inspirational features of Sir Elvin’s (sic) life’. Any suggestions from Wembley Matters readers would be very welcome . I’m sure that in their new inclusive, democratic and consultative mood, Ark would be delighted to take them on board.

 Meanwhile Hank Roberts of the ATL has written to Annabel Bates (Headteacher designate) about the way the decision was made:

Dear Ms Bates,

You have informed me, as a member of Copland staff, that you have decided on the name of the proposed ARK academy on our Copland Community school site, to be the 'ARK Elvin Academy'.

May I ask on what basis the committee of four staff and six students, that was set up to consider the new school's name, was selected? For example, did you ask for volunteers, was there any particular qualification, were they picked out of a hat?     

Were the committee given one proposed name, a selection of names or did they put forward their own names for consideration?

I also ask, was the Headteacher Dr Richard Marshall and the senior leadership team consulted and if not, why not? Were the Interim Executive Board (IEB) who are the governing body*, consulted? I know that the staff were not consulted, or asked for suggestions or given any options to take part in what you call “an important step forward .. for our school”. But why not? And is your proposed school logo to be decided by the same select committee?

Is this the manner in which you intend to make important decisions affecting the whole school in the future?  There has been no staff 'buy in' to this decision. Even when the name of a pet dog is being chosen, normally the whole family are involved.

I look forward to your response.

Yours sincerely
Hank Roberts  
Joint Copland NUT Rep and ATL Brent Branch Secretary

 * The IEB remains responsible for school decisions until the funding agreement has been signed

Pavey misses a chance to learn how to stand up for education

Guest blog by 'Localist'
 

Several hundred people attended the London Education Conference at the Institute of Education on Saturday which discussed how to build on the success of the London Challenge and to further raise standards of education in London. 

Those present included authors, educational psychologists, headteachers, journalists, lecturers, members of the London Assembly, school governors and teachers. Also present were councillors including Leaders of London councils and Leaders of Children’s Services in London councils. 

Not present were either Muhammad Butt (Leader of Brent Council) or Michael Pavey (Lead Member for Children's Services in Brent). One possible reason for their absence was the presence at the Conference of someone whose recent principled and bold actions would have put their own feebleness to shame. For also in attendance was John White, Leader of Children's Services in Barking and Dagenham, who 3 weeks ago helped to challenge Michael Gove’s forced academisation policy in the High Court and was granted an injunction by Mr Justice Collins. 

An opportunity missed for Mr Pavey and Mr Butt as  John White could have given them all sorts of helpful tips on how to keep local education local rather than follow the Brent Council way which seems to be, ask people to vote for you in local elections and then, when elected, helpfully implement the policies of the party those same voters clearly rejected in the national election. Meanwhile at Copland, the IEB won’t allow a secret ballot on academisation, A level students have slipped behind because courses weren’t adequately staffed and their retired ex-teacher is not allowed on the premises to voluntarily help them catch up.

Copland teachers denied chance to see pupils through to their exams

We have got used to teachers' professional views being ignored or thought of as no consequence, as in the case of the recent Radio4 panel discussion about history teaching with Michael Gove and academic historians, but with no actual history teachers present.

One would expect their views to be taken account of when a school is going through substantial changes and students will be affected.

However a meeting of the Interim Executive Board of Copland Community High School yesterday seemed to model their behaviour on that of Michael Gove.

The teacher unions had asked that leaving dates for staff made redundant be deferred until September so that they could continue to support their students who are taking examinations. The IEB decided that as all classes could be covered so all redundancies will take place at Easter.

Clearly from an educational point of view it is preferable, and perhaps essential, that teachers who know the students and their strengths and weaknesses and have taught them the subject, should see them all the way through to their examinations.

It appears that the IEB accepted the word of the headteacher on the issues discussed rather than subjecting them to the kind of rigorous challenge that Ofsted now expects regarding the quality of teaching and learning.

Christine Gilbert to head up Brent Education Commission as school improvement changes take place

Last week I briefly attended the farewell party for eighteen or so people who are leaving Brent's School Improvement Service, including Faira Ellks who has led the service for many years. Some had accepted early retirement, others redundancy, some have set up a consultancy and a few had been employed by Brent schools who will sell their expertise, such as Reading Recovery,  to other schools..

As I looked on I reflected on the years of experience and expertise in the group that has done so much to improve Brent schools, that will be lost as a consequence of this cull. Yes, a core service will remain but its quality is uncertain and yes, Brent headteachers have formed a Brent Schools a Brent Schools Partnership to support each other, but its quality is untested.

Interestingly these concerns were echoed by Rebecca Matthews, the new interim head of School Improvement, at the Brent Governors Conference this week. She said that the BSP raised issues that include:

• lack of clarity on aspects such as accountability and leadership
• the capacity among senior leaders of schools to undertake the tasks involved
• the threat to a school's own standards when its senior leaders are engaged on collaborative activities with other schools
• measuring and evaluating the impact of such interventions
• engaging all schools so that they looked beyond themselves

As someone said at the farewell party, 'Schools won't know what they are missing until it is gone'.

Matthews also outlined the challenge of Ofsted's new emphasis on all schools being rated Good or Outstanding and the potential of a sudden drop in the rating of schools rated 'Good' under the old Ofsted criteria when inspected under the new framework, particularly if they had been coasting or facing new pressures since the previous Ofsted.

The authority itself faces the challenge of diminishing resources both human and financial which means a reduced core School Improvement team and the challenge of dealing with the mixed economy of school categories - maintained, academy, free - with lack of powers over the latter.

Rebecca Matthews said that as a consequence of diminishing resources a new core offer to schools would be made which would include:

• A closer focus on 'need' rather than a universal offer
• A lighter touch with 'secure' schools with the bulk of support going to schools in need of improvement
• Brokering school to school support arrangements
• Regular meetings to judge and recognise progress rather than once a year meeting
• An emphasis on the speed of improvement

To address the wider challenge facing the authority a short-term Education Commission for Brent would be set up. Interestingly in the light of the appointment of Sara Williams as acting director of Children and Families, this will be headed up not by her but by the council's Interim Chief Executive, Christine Gilbert (former head of Ofsted) and Robert Hill from the University of London Institute of Education. They would look at the context of the performance of Brent schools, examine inspection evidence, visit schools and take evidence from stakeholders, including governors. They would identify the 'scope for innovative support for improvement' and work with the BSP and Teaching Schools on a sustainable shared model.

The Commission will report in November 2013.

In a way this can be interpreted as the authority attempting to claw back responsibility for  school improvement from the group that set up the BSP. With Ofsted and the DfE focusing on the role of local authority's when their area's schools are under-performing the LA has to demonstrate that it is proactive.

Cllr Michael Pavey, lead member for Children and Families, had a Q&A session,  in a candid reply to a question from me why Camden had managed to keep the maintained sector intact but Brent hadn't, said that the authority had 'allowed the best schools to walk away' and now faced losing 'our failing schools because of government legislation'.  He repeated his belief that the imposition of an Interim Excutive Board and academisation was the only viable solution for Copland High School because it was failing its pupils and the local authority did not have the resources to support it.. When asked about how Copland had been allowed by the local authority to get into that state he said, 'I can't say. That was before my remit'.

Unfortunately the situation at Copland, and precisely that last question, is likely to put Brent Council's school improvement arrangements under the Ofsted and DfE microscope. However, it also raises questions about the government policy where foundation schools, academies and free schools have autonomy with reduced powers of direct intervention by the LA whilst that at the same time they have an overall responsibility for the education and well-being of children in the borough.

Pavey agreed with a governor who said that governors had not been involved in the development of the Brent Schools Partnership despite having a strategic responsibility for school improvement, and should be better represented on the Brent Schools Partnership.  Only one place on the headteacher dominated management committee has been allocated to governors.

Interestingly,in his workshop, Luca Salice, Vice Chair of Camden Schools Forum, discussed the imposition of  IEBs by the local authority, not as a way of bringing about academisation, as in the Copland case, but as a way of the LA preventing a school academising against the wishes of teachers and parents.

Brent's headaches as it tries to expand secondary school places

Brent Council is faced with increasing demand for secondary school places as the increase in primary numbers moves through the system. Unfortunately, although charged with an overall responsibility to provide school places, to a large extent it exercises 'responsibility without power' as so many Brent secondary schools have become academies or are voluntarily aided and sources of finance are not directly under the Council's control.

An extensive study has led to a report going before the Executive on January 14th which recommends expansion in some schools (subject to governing body approval) and the use of the Gwenneth Rickus Building (Centre for Staff Development) in Brentfield Road as a six forms of entry secondary school. This building which was formerly part of Sladebrook High School, is next to the Swaminarayan Independent School, and is now surplus to requirements with the facility moving to the Civic Centre in the summer.

Adding to the complexity is the fact that three secondary schools, due to parental preference, are currently operating below capacity. These are Copland, following the financial mismanagement allegations; Crest Academy Boys and Newman College. The report states that the first priority is to bring these schools up to scratch so that all their places are used.

Wembley High is ruled out of expansion because it is proposed to make this an all-through school providing places for primary as well as secondary children in line with Ark and Preston Manor. The governing body of Preston Manor have recently decided to become a Cooperative Academy although this is likely to be strongly contested by education unions. The Copland and Alperton expansions are subject to rebuilds under the government's Priority School Buildings Programme.

If this wasn't enough Gove's reforms have thrown another wild card into the game with the report stating that there are three secondary  free school proposals:

In the event that government’s grant application for 2013-14 and following years is inadequate to meet the Council’s entire demand for funding new provision, we are considering the following options:

 Free Schools: The Executive noted that the demand for new school places cannot be met only through the expansion of existing schools due to the limited availability of funding; the Council is required to promote additional ways of creating school places by pursuing the current government agenda on free schools and academies. The latest round of free school applications is being considered by the Department for Education (DfE) in the new year with an opening date of September 2014. Given that the Council is not looking to open a new secondary school at this date, it has not collaborated with any potential providers at this point. There are likely applications submitted for Brent, however. These include:

• an independent school group looking to open an 11 to 18 school in Wembley – of approximately 4 forms of entry, planning to provide Year 10 places immediately as well as Year 7.

• a parent led school in Cricklewood to address perceived lack of choice for parents in that area (6FE).

4.5 In addition an already approved free school has been looking to acquire a site in Brent and open a 6FE secondary school in September 2013.

4.6 All three of the above have said in discussion that they would aim to meet the Partnership Criteria agreed by the Executive in August 2012 but it is clear that two of them would be likely to use the freedoms available to free schools in respect of staffing and the curriculum

Note that although the Council says it has not 'collaborated with any potential providers' they appear, as oen would expect,  to have had discussions with them. The council cannot really take these into account in its present planning as decision making is with the DfE and even when some free school applications have been approved they have failed to materialise.

Clearly the arguments made against academies and free schools on the grounds that they undermine the local authority's  capacity to make clear and rational plans to meet pupil demand gain traction based on these difficulties.  Most of the proposals are given a Medium Risk category in the report with the Gwenneth Rickus proposal deemed High Risk because of potential planning issues.

The Kingsbury High proposal would result in an extremely large school with 435 pupils in each year group based on a class size of 30.

Summary of the proposals:

School	Status	Current Forms of Entry	Proposed Addition Forms of Entry	Delivery of additional forms of entry
Alperton	Academy	7.3	1	2017/18-2019/20 (PFI)
Ark	Academy	6	0
Capital City	Academy	6.5	0
Claremont	Academy	8.4	0
Convent Jesus and Mary	VA Academy	6	0
Copland	Foundation	8	1	2017/18-2019/20 (PFI)
JFS	VA	10	0
Kingsbury	Academy	10.5	4.5	2015/16-2016/17
Newman Catholic	VA Trust	5	0
Preston Manor	Foundation Trust (pending Academy)	8.4	0
Queens Park	Academy	6.7	2	2014/15
St Gregory’s RC	VA	5.9	0
The Crest Boys	Academy	4	1	September 2014
The Crest Girls	Academy	5	1	September 2014
Wembley High	Academy (proposed All-Through)	7	0
Gwenneth Rickus Building	Possible satellite of existing school	0	6	2015/16-2016/17