News RSS Feed


Local Business Directory

Council-backed plan to take schools out of local authority control rejected for 'educational reasons'


A £250 million program to rebuild schools across the borough is in serious doubt after governors rejected a plan to take a school out of local authority control.

Governors at George Mitchell in Leyton on Wednesday voted overwhelmingly against establishing a single trust to manage the Farmer Road school and Norlington School for Boys.

The plan to establish a trust led by the Institute of Education and move the schools on to a ‘leisure complex’ next to Leyton Sports Ground was an integral part of the borough’s Building Schools for the Future program.

George Mitchell headteacher Helen Jeffery said the educational argument for establishing a trust had been rejected.

She added: “I and my staff have become increasingly concerned that the plan for us to offer joint year 10 and 11 courses with Norlington in new buildings from 2012 will not bring our young people the benefits we had hoped for.

“A joint KS4 and 5 curriculum raises many issues impossible to resolve without single leadership of the two schools.”

Three-quarters of George Mitchell parents voted against the trust plan at a meeting last Monday (December 7).

Ms Jeffery added: “Governors took into consideration the views of the staff and parents. It was not an easy decision to vote against plans staff and governors have been working on for over two years, but governors felt it was better to vote against the plans even at this late stage than proceed with something they did not believe would bring about the much hoped-for improvements in the quality of educational and building provision.

“It is important to stress that George Mitchell School has in no way been influenced by the community groups with their own interest in our developments.

“We cannot know at this stage what the future holds for us. I have promised staff, students, parents and governors that I will fight very hard indeed to ensure that our lovely, constantly improving school still benefits from much-needed investment through Building Schools for the Future.”

Governors at Norlington approved the trust's constitution last month, despite a series of strikes by teachers opposed to the plan.

Council leader Cllr Chris Robbins said: “This decision is obviously disappointing for us and I see it as a shame that at the eleventh hour, the school appears to have withdrawn its support.

“That said, however, it is the governing body’s decision and we respect that entirely. Whether it comes to be seen as a missed opportunity we will see, but our priority is now, and always has been, providing an excellent education for these young people.”

Click here to follow the Waltham Forest Guardian on Twitter

Comments(9)

everoptimistic says...
3:33pm Thu 10 Dec 09

Helen Jeffrey and her governors seem to have made a sensible decision here - there seem to be a lot of things still up in the air. If only all the article were correct. I believe Norlington Governors voted to accept the Trust albeit with a very small majority - lots of govs seemed to vote with their feet to avoid voting with their hands. It will be interesting to see how this goes forward now.

GrumpyG says...
4:18pm Thu 10 Dec 09

Well done George Mitchell governors! A victory for common sense and local control of our schools.

Helen, Walthamstow says...
4:56pm Thu 10 Dec 09

If I remember rightly, there was only a small handful of governors at the Norlington meeting. I questioned at the time on this site whether the meeting was quorate. The answer is probably no.

aninsidertoo says...
9:35pm Thu 10 Dec 09

Of real interest is why the head has changed her mind - nothing to do with the fact that indifferent standards and too much time away from the school have led to the realisation that being head of a federated school is but a dim prospect?

lindasfriend says...
10:13pm Thu 10 Dec 09

Well, rats leave sinking ships, or so the saying goes, aninsidertoo.
I like the way H.J. says the decision 'has in no way been influenced by the community groups with their own interest in our developments'. Well ... where would we be if the community groups hadn't kicked up a stink, told people what was going on, informed the Charity Commission of the council's illegal intentions etc etc.? I also take issue with the 'own interest' bit. Helen Jeffrey had a very big interest in the development - the prospect of more power, kudos and money. Unlike her, the community was horrified at what was about to happen to the education and wellbeing of our children. Some of the borough's most vulnerable kids being put into a massive school run by an institution with THEIR own interests and losing the one of the few local facilities that could be a lifeline for some of these kids, i.e. the sports field - in its entirety. We, the campaigners, are the ones with the children's interest at heart. Many of us believe also that an area of beauty has an unquantifiable beneficial effect on the people around it, including the children. I would like to say 'How dare you!' but I already know the answer to that - she, along with the others pushing for this, Robbins and Kiernan, are totally comfortable bullying to get their own way. After all, when power, kudos and money are to be gained, why bother worrying about the welfare or views of the people.

everoptimistic says...
6:12pm Fri 11 Dec 09

I wonder if Chris Kiernan has a Plan B.

LEYTONOLDBOY says...
7:09pm Fri 11 Dec 09

He's probably marshalling his other weapons of mass destruction at this very moment.

stevewhite says...
1:10am Mon 14 Dec 09

I think the most insulting part of H J's comments are about the community group's own interest. The implication here is that they only act in their own self-interest not for any wider social justice, which is the case. Is it unreasonable or self-interested to want to preserve one of the only large green spaces in the area and the only one that cricket can be played on?
Isn't the truth about this fiasco that the whole thing was half-baked from the start? Ambitious people wanting to make a name for themselves in the council and elsewhere thought it would be a nice place to build a school. I suspect that the fact that Waltham Forest is an olympic borough had something to do with it. Here would be a showcase for all to see who visited the borough on the way to the Olympic Games. The problem, of course, was that it would take away sports facilities from the borough. This in a borough where the sports facilities have been run down over the years A bit of a contradiction here!

I am really pleased that the community group took a principled stand. I am also pleased about the other group of heroes- those at Norlington School. The teachers there fought against their governing body, who certainly represented no one but themselves. They bravely went on strike over the principal that schools should be democratically controlled, not controlled by outside interests through a trust, which has an inbuilt majority on the governors.

The local council were only too keen to wash their hands of the responsibility that they have been elected to carry out regarding the running of local schools in this case. I only hope that local people now exercise their rights and elect a council that want to help run local schools for local people in a democratic way. I hope they realise that Robbins and co are not the people for this job as they have already voluntered to give our schools away. ( for their own interests?)

lindasfriend says...
12:58pm Mon 14 Dec 09

Can anyone tell me please - is this the end of the trust idea - or only in so far as the trust running all of the schools?
“A joint KS4 and 5 curriculum raises many issues impossible to resolve without single leadership of the two schools.” Helen Jeffery seems to be indicating from this and her letter to parents last week that she wants a sixth form. I suspect she's still hoping to get a bigger school to run despite her statement in the parents' letter about how much she values 'our lovely little school'.


Most popular






Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »

Local Businesses