I attended the Park Hall Academy consultation event tonight at Longton Town Hall led by Ian Kendrick from the Children and Young People Directorate along with representatives from the academy sponsor (Stoke-on-Trent College) and the predecessor schools’ senior management teams (Edensor and Mitchell). The event was also attended by a good number of parents and interested residents from the communities which the new academy will serve.
The Building Schools for the Future Programme has been fraught with controversy here in Stoke. However, from this meeting I sensed a measured enthusiasm for the principles of the reorganisation and for the proposal on the table.
A few parents were angry about a shortcoming in the admissions process this year. They were understandably not satisfied with their school allocations which bore no resemblance to their applications, hopefully however this will be rectified through appeal. This issue, partly affecting families that live the Meir Hay area of my ward is something that I had already raised with the Director of Children’s Services.
With that exception it appeared to me that peoples’ main worry with the Park Hall Academy was the timescale – were their children going to be in the generation that benefited. Given the history and tumult surrounding of the process you can truly appreciate that worry and the desire to just get on and build the thing!
Other than that there was a good deal of information disseminated which addressed attendee’s other concerns – some outline details of what the new academy will be like were set out.Two of my principle apprehensions were laid to rest.
The first was safe routes to and from the academy – I really worry that Anchor Rd in its current form is neither safe enough nor fit to cope with additional transport associated with an academy. I was reassured that measures will be put in place, in the first instance a detailed study commissioned by the council to be conducted by Mott McDonald. This is a company with good and well renowned pedigree and expertise in this area. This anxiety was shared by many parents and I think we will all await the results of Mott McDonald’s work with interest.
The second, interestingly for me, was not raised by one single parent as one of their concerns. I’m talking about the governance arrangements for the new academy. This is cited as the principle bug bear by the anti-academies lobby, but it doesn’t seem to greatly worry most people. I was very encouraged that the sponsor wished to emphasise that the academy would be led by the community – including via governorships.
This was especially pleasing for me, as I had had reservations that the statutory requirement of one parent governor would be insufficient as the sole extent of community representation on the new governing body. Happily, the sponsor was keen to indicate that such under representation would not occur. Working with the community I am now certain that the Stoke-on-Trent College as sponsor will get the balance of representation right on the governing body when the academy’s constitution is drafted.
Like many parents, I want to see bricks a mortar as soon as possible, but only if the plans are right. The devil is in the detail and parents need to be fully informed of that detail. I eagerly await the publications of draft building, transition, and transport plans & the proposed constitution.