Let’s work together to find an acceptable schools model

We write to you as a staff to express our concerns following engagement sessions and the recent publication of ESC’s policy letter. We have chosen to write at this relatively early stage so that there is sufficient time for our points to be addressed and so that our offer to work with ESC to find an acceptable model can be taken up.

We wish to make clear that we are not opposed to change. We do however ask that any changes to our education system are based upon thorough research and supported by clear evidence that both educational and pastoral outcomes will be improved.

We have listed our majority concerns for ease of reference:

n We are concerned about the lack of focus on 11-16 provision in the policy letter. We question whether an investment of £30m. on a relocated sixth form is prudent considering the resulting lack of capital remaining to make much needed improvements to 11-16.

n We are concerned about the change to space standards. These concerns were previously expressed in regard to the two-school model. It was hoped that any replacement model would address this. Specifically, LBHS is due to see a significant increase in pupil numbers (a maximum of 780). The school was built for 660 students and currently has approximately 530. We do not understand why the space standards of the building would be compromised and have specific concerns regarding social space, movement between lessons, classroom numbers and the availability of specialist classrooms, e.g. science laboratories.

n We are concerned about the alterations to class tipping points. Teaching classes of 28 in mixed ability subjects will impact on the teacher’s ability to meet the varied needs within the class. In subjects where setting is preferable, we have concerns about the ability to make smaller, more focused groups for lower-attaining students and those with special educational needs and/or disabilities (SEND). We are also concerned about the impact of this on higher attaining groups where the class sizes would need to be much larger in order to accommodate smaller sets for lower-attaining students. We have specific concerns about the impact on student wellbeing.

Will our students feel a sense of belonging?

n We are concerned about plans to staff the sixth form. The projection that 70% of staff would be based at Les Ozouets would result in staff with limited timetables, or staff teaching outside their specialist subjects. Fewer than 70% would see compromises in the pastoral care of students. Neither of these outcomes are desirable or an improvement on our current sixth form provision.

n We are concerned about the narrowing of the curriculum. Les Varendes currently benefits from the addition of a sixth form, allowing for a wider curriculum offer. With reduced tipping points and a lack of mention of plans to increase staff numbers, it appears that KS4 options are likely to become ‘equally narrow’ in all of our high schools. Similarly, a separate sixth form could, without significant revenue implications, struggle to provide a full range of options to post-16 students.

n We are concerned about the reallocation of staff and the mixed messages regarding this. Firstly, we were told in a meeting at LBHS that the school closing would be the only one affected (please note this was not included in the minutes of the meeting). Other schools have been given the message that all staff will reapply for roles. We were also told that P&R would be responsible for this, yet P&R have stated that it is ESC’s responsibility. Obviously this issue is of great importance to colleagues across the sector and we wish to seek clarification on this point as soon as possible.

n We are concerned about the lack of clarity regarding the role of The Secondary Partnership. Once again, mixed messages have been received. In some meetings the objective for the high schools to each have their own ethos and independence has been emphasised. Yet in a public meeting this was contradicted. Specifically, it was stated that curriculum would be aligned across the schools. Once again, we would respectfully ask for clarification on this in a timely manner.

n We are concerned about the plans for coordination between the high schools, sixth form and The Guernsey Institute. While admirable, there is insufficient detail in the policy letter to explain how this will function. For example, if timetables need aligning, how will this impact TGI, who operate a wholly more flexible day? How will staff travel be planned for? These ‘operational details’ are vital to the success of the plans and we do not feel able to fully assess them without this detail.

Staff have been accused of bringing only problems to the table, rather than solutions. As such, we have chosen to list three possible alternative ways forward:

n Adopt the suggestion of Deputy Andy Cameron. While not the most inclusive of options, this allows significant capital savings to be made. Those capital savings could then be reallocated by investing in the 11-16 sector, e.g. through providing adequate building extensions.

n If the Sixth Form is to remain on the Les Varendes site, avoid the costly overheads of a separate operation by running this as an 11-18 school. The lack of equity could then be addressed by reinvesting the revenue savings into bringing the other 11-16 schools in line with Les Varendes in terms of pupil-teacher ratios and curriculum breadth.

n The final, and perhaps most sensible, way forward considering the lack of consensus among different schools is to publish the review. Bring representatives from each school together to look at the relative merits of each configuration, as well as the perceived compromises, with the ultimate aim of coming to a consensus understanding of a way forward.

As a staff, we believe we have the island’s children’s best interests at heart and urge our elected representatives to take heed of our serious concerns.

The staff of Les Beaucamps High School

n A survey of staff support for the letter was conducted. Of 40 responses, 97.5% were in support. The table shows the percentage breakdown of support for the letter among responders.