Results of Parent-Led Survey

of Parents and Carers of

Children at Parrs Wood High

School re the Proposal to

Create a ‘Hard Federation’

June 2010

2

Contents Page No. Foreword 3 Results of survey of over 100 parents 4 Recommendations 8 Appendix 1 - Note re survey reliability 9 Appendix 2 - Information sent out as part of the original consultation 10 Appendix 3 - Comments made by parents 13

3

Foreword

While writing up this report, we were informed that legal challenges to the proposal to Federate with two schools in Trafford had been accepted by Manchester’s Local Education Authority and that the proposal has therefore been withdrawn in its current form. Nevertheless this parent-led survey of responses to the proposal offers a significant contribution to the school’s consultation process. The findings summarised here represent not only the views of a large number of parents but a level of commitment to the school and a quality of informed debate that merit the full attention of all parties concerned with the administration and governance of Parrs Wood High School. It was not our original intention to open up a wider discussion about the values and nature of the education provided at Parrs Wood for the children of South Manchester, but parents have insisted on contributing fully and in depth and we have tried to represent that energy faithfully in this report. Parents told us again and again that their response to the survey was motivated by frustration with a perceived lack of adequate consultation by the school and in particular its Interim Executive Board. It will be clear to the reader that this summary of results represents an invaluable resource in the continuing debate about the future of Parrs Wood. When conducting the survey we found that the interest in this issue stretched far beyond those whom the IEB had originally proposed to consult. In addition to the survey we have had emails and comments from parents of children still in primary schools and even parents of babies, living in the area. Grandparents, ex-pupils, ex-teachers and past governors also made their views clear to us; but we had no brief to represent their opinions here. Governors and political representatives should however be aware of the extent of the sense of investment in the future of the school amongst the wider community. We would like to thank all those who helped with the parent survey and other people from across South Manchester who got involved in the Federation consultation in other ways especially the parents and governors from Broad Oak Primary School.

The Parent-Led Parents and Carers Online Survey Team. Marlene Brennand

Helen Sharman Abigail Sterne

Julie Wilkinson

Email parrswoodfuture@gmail.com

4

Results of Parent-Led Survey of Parents and Carers of Children at Parrs Wood High

School re the Proposal to Create a “Hard Federation ” June 2010

This document summarises the results of a parent-led survey of parents and carers of children at Parrs Wood High School re the proposal to create a “Hard Federation”. The on-line survey was started on 9 June 2010 and stopped, for the purposes of the main body of this report, on 25 June 2010. 110 parents and carers completed the survey, representing a total of around 130 children. 89% of these children are current pupils from across all years within the School. The remainder were due to start at Parrs Wood in September 2011. Taking into account the fact that the survey was mainly publicised through word of mouth this is a good response rate. Details about the survey and its reliability are discussed in Appendix 1 of this report. The key findings of the survey were:

• 97% of respondents do not support the proposal to create a Hard Federation with two Trafford schools

• 3% of respondents do support the proposal to create a Hard Federation with two Trafford schools

Many of the parents and carers also took the opportunity within the survey to comment on proposals. Only one person who supports the proposal also left a comment saying that they “think that it is a positive move” (Ref 090). All other comments parents raised were concerns about a wide range of issues (see Appendix 3). Following the completion of the survey these comments were analysed and categorised into seven areas of concern. The first six categories are very similar to the questions the online survey team had raised at the start of the survey. The number of parents making comments in each category is shown in Table 1 below. Table 1 – Number of respondents who raised a specific area of concern in the free text comment box of the survey Category Number and percentage of

parents surveyed making one or more comments in this category*

1-Lack of common interest/community. E.g. two different LEAs and education systems.

28 (25%)

2- The make up and balance of power on the proposed Governing Body.^

24 (22%)

3 –The level of focus on Parrs Wood’s issues on a Federated Governing Body.^

3 (3%)

4- The need for a period of stability for the school, as opposed to further major change.

14 (13%)

5 –The implications for staff morale and effectiveness. 6 (5%) 6- The inadequacy of the official consultation process; lack of clarity over or disagreement with who is to make the decision to proceed, including calls for a public meeting.

18 (6%)

7- Other concerns including re financial issues not covered in the above categories.

37 (34%)

* Percentages have been rounded to nearest whole number ^ There was some overlap between comments in areas 2 and 3

5

Further comments The headings and paragraphs below represent the arguments of the survey team. Respondents had the choice whether to read these comments or not, when accessing the survey form. In italics beneath each point we have added further comments amplifying our responses with parents’ replies to the survey. These comments have been selected to represent both the range and variety of the replies. For the full list of parents’ comments please see Appendix 3. Issue 1 - What is the common interest between these schools? The schools are in separate communities (note the Broad Oak School is in Trafford and not the one in East Didsbury). The pupil selection processes within the Local Authorities are different. It is a not a “natural partnership”. The main reason it seems to have been developed is because of the circumstances of the current Executive Head Teacher. Structuring schools around one key individual makes the organisation potentially vulnerable when that person leaves. If a Federation is desirable then wouldn’t a South Manchester Federation be preferable?

My main comment is that there seems little in common between the schools other than the Executive Head Teacher. (Ref 017) No obvious community or geographical link with Trafford. Local politics are very different. I value the Labour controlled local government in Manchester and have no desire to have a different political influence. (Ref 021) Joining with another secondary and a primary school in another borough, with no natural connection seems to be entirely ludicrous. (Ref 045) To quote the National College for School Leadership, they state the common themes for successful collaborations are •A common underlying ethos or loyalty (such as a faith). •A common employer of status (such as the local authority or diocese). •A real geographical community with a shared labour market. •A shared sense of urgency and priority. None of these seem to have been adequately addressed or evidenced by the proposal as set out. (Ref 089)

Issue 2 - What is the advantage for Parrs Wood School of having a Governing Body that also serves two Trafford schools? The proposal for a single Governing Body for the three schools will mean that the two Trafford schools will hold the “balance of power”. There will be only five dedicated Parrs Wood Governors out of a total Governing Body of twenty five members. This means that Parrs Wood parents cannot be confident the new Governing Body will act in the best interests of Parrs Wood. The new Governing Body will have a duty to serve the interests of the Federation. There is nothing in the documentation to require a set number of Community Governors from Parrs Wood.

Under the proposed scheme, parent views will be severely under-represented. (Ref 011) Parrs Wood is a big school and it seems misguided to dilute the power and accountability of the governing body. (Ref 016) I am concerned that one governing body would not be able to represent the interests of Parrs Wood pupils, teachers and parents. (Ref 031)

6

I feel that since the school was put into special measures I have had almost no representation at the school to change any aspect of my children’s education. This new "federation" will only make this worse. I surely have the right to have a meaningful input into how my children are educated this federation is simply a vehicle for Tarun Kapur to control three schools and to isolate the parents from each of the schools. (Ref 037) Most worrying of all is the proposal regarding the Governing Body membership which will actually put Parrs Wood parents and indeed all the parents on the Governing Body in the minority, this is completely contrary to Government Strategy which is to place parents at the core of school improvement and working in partnership with managers and educationalists. (Ref 119) False economies of scale at the expense of accountability to the pupils and parents of Parrs Wood High School (Ref 116)

Issue 3 - How will the new Governing Body have the time to give Parrs Wood, a particularly large school, the attention it needs? One Governing Body overseeing three schools (working across two Local Education Authorities) would be unwieldy. The sheer amount of business in these meetings will reduce the level of attention to detail Governors can give to the concerns of Parrs Wood.

One of the main problems at Parrs Wood is its size - this proposal will only exacerbate these issues. (Ref 033) A governing body of 25 is unlikely to achieve anything. (Ref 117)

Issue 4 - How can a major change in the life of the School be justified at this time? Parrs Wood had a satisfactory Ofsted report; it has yet to achieve ‘outstanding’ status. The School acknowledges that there is further to go. What Parrs Wood needs is a period of stability with strong support from a full Governing Body representing parents, staff and community. The Federation idea is a distraction from dealing with the need to create this stability in Parrs Wood and retain a highly motivated staff team. The focus should be on getting the basics right around creating a happy and improving school.

It has only just come out of special measures and needs to focus on building on this achievement and not be distracted by the management of two other schools. (Ref 022) The Federation idea is actually a distraction from dealing with the need to create stability in Parrs Wood and retain a highly motivated staff team. The focus should be on getting the basics right around creating a happy and improving school. (Ref 044) I believe this proposal is a distraction and will not help in focussing minds and building on the work done thus far. (Ref 059) Parrs Wood has been through a huge period of change over the last number of years and needs time to consolidate for the benefit of existing staff and students. (Ref 082)

Issue 5 - How can staff work well together if some of them are expected to travel between two schools over eight miles apart? The Federation will create a two tier system of teachers with new teachers having to travel, between the schools which are over 13 km (8.2 miles) apart as required. This is not conducive to job satisfaction and the creation of high performing teams of staff in each subject group. We believe that there is a risk that even more staff will leave if the proposal is implemented with consequent damaging impact on our children’s education. Also, staff will be less familiar with

7

Parrs Wood pupils because they (the staff) will be working across different sites rather than as part of one united school closely connected to its community.

I can see no real benefits to children or staff at Parrs Wood. Continuity of teaching would be lost if teachers have to travel between 2 sites in different areas that couldn't be further apart. (Ref 025) To have staff work across all 3 schools the chances of them getting to know our children for the individuals they are negligible. (Ref 033) How can teachers be expected to travel so far between schools and keep the children's learning consistent? (Ref 071)

Issue 6 - Concerns re the official consultation process and who makes the final decision on whether to proceed. We have concerns about the consultation and decision-making process about the Federation proposal. When Parrs Wood went into ‘Special Measures’ the School’s Governing Body was replaced by a much smaller “Interim Executive Board”. This group does not have the levels of community, staff or parent representation that more traditional governing bodies have. It cannot, therefore, represent the wide range of interests and views that are included in normal governing bodies.

Joining of a school that is too large with two others is a ridiculous idea that if it was put to a full Parrs Wood Governing Body would never gain support. (Ref 035) The validity if the Interim Executive Board making this decision is questionable. When the school went into Special Measures a Shadow governing Body was supposed to be put in place to take over when the school came out of special measures. (Ref 054) The glossy brochure suggests that this important proposal is a done deal. Have parents been consulted before now? (Ref 080) The timeline to implement is aggressive. Why is a major change being rushed through in such a short time without any formal consultation with the community? Is this change in the interests of individuals over the collective interests of our children and community? (Ref 109)

In addition several parents called for a public meeting.

I also feel an open forum for parents should be a requirement in this process. (Ref 012) I believe there is a need to discuss the proposal at a public forum, before I can decide whether to support / otherwise the proposal. (Ref 020) I would like to be part of a balanced presentation / discussion of the proposal.(Ref 068) The consultation process (in particular the failure to convene a public meeting and the misleading information in the consultation documentation) is a disgrace and will mean that consultees may not properly understand the issues that Federation raise. (Ref 068)

Issue 7 - Concerns about the business case for the proposal and financial issues. We were very concerned to find from the Chair of the IEB that there was no detailed report setting out the business and education case for the proposal. This certainly seems to be

8

leading some respondents to conclude that the change may be rather more in the interests of the current senior management of the school than of pupils present and future. The lack of evidence raises questions about the IEB’s approach, including serious concerns about how Parrs Wood will ensure that its own resources are not ‘siphoned off’ to the other schools.

The consultation document gives no information regarding for example how the Parrswood School Budget will be affected e.g. will monies from Parrswood be channelled into the other two schools. (Ref 119) I can't see the need for a hard federation. It does sound as though it has been suggested to keep the executive head in a significant (and presumably costly) role for all 3 schools (Ref 030). How will Manchester school funding for Parrs Wood be ring-fenced/protected and not used to support the less well funded Trafford schools? (Ref 113)

Recommendations of the survey team

1. That the findings of the official consultation are published on the Parrs Wood

School Website. 2. That the Interim Executive Board (IEB) discuss and respond in writing to the

seven issues set out above within two months of receipt of this report.

3. Following this, the IEB to set up a public meeting, to take place in term time, to discuss the proposals. (As it is such an important issue we would expect all the IEB to attend).

4. The IEB to carry out an independent and anonymous survey of the views of

staff about the proposal in order to allay any possible staff concerns about the impact of their contribution on their relationship with management, or their future careers.

5. That if the IEB wish to continue to pursue the Federation Proposal, they

present a properly argued business and education case supported by appropriate evidence. The IEB should either commission or conduct independent research into a range of options for the future of the school, including other possible links with South Manchester schools, and evaluating existing federal and other structures of collaboration between secondary schools throughout the country; such research to detail cost benefits and risks. Once completed the research should be made available to all interested parties as an extension of the consultation process including a further online survey of parents (and future parents) that is well advertised.

6. That the IEB puts minutes of the meeting in which the proposal and this report

is discussed on the School website.

9

Appendix 1

Note re survey reliability The on-line survey was carried out using Google Forms. Anyone completing the survey was asked to provide contact details and details of the children they were responsible for. If anyone did not provide these details we indicated that their replies could not be included in our findings. Only two respondents failed to provide details and so have not been included in the statistical analysis. A ‘spot check’ was carried out of 20% of people completing the survey. The results of this check (based on responses selected through a random number generator) showed that of the 22 checked all but one (who could not be contacted) was eligible to complete the survey. We can therefore, be very confident that generally only parents and carers who were eligible completed the survey. However, if the Parrs Wood Interim Executive Board (IEB) requests it we are prepared to provide a hard copy of the contact details for S Evason to check, in our presence, against the School’s register. Note re percentages Figures have been rounded to 0 decimal places.

10

Appendix 2 Information that was sent out as part of the origin al

consultation Parent Led Survey of Parents and Carers of Children at Parrs

Wood High School re the Proposal to Create a “Hard Federation” June 2010

If you have a child at Parrs Wood High School or who is about to start there in September 2010 please take a few moments to read this. It concerns possible changes at the School that may affect your child’s education. There is a consultation currently taking place about the proposal to establish a formal link between Parrs Wood High School and two schools in Trafford (a secondary school and a junior school). The proposal is to create what is known as a “Hard Federation”. You can find out what the School say about the proposal by clicking on the following link http://www.parrswood.manchester.sch.uk/docs/federation.pdf . Any changes that the Governing Body and Local Education Authority agree to now will affect Parrs Wood’s long term future – not just that of our children. The leaflet produced by the School tries hard to sell the idea. However, some parents and carers have serious concerns about the proposals, the current consultation and the decision making process the school plans to go through. In the interests of balance our main concerns are listed below: 1. What is the common interest between these schools? The schools are in separate communities (note the Broad Oak School is in Trafford and not the one in East Didsbury). The pupil selection processes within the Local Authorities are different. It is a not a “natural partnership”. The main reason it seems to have been developed is because of the circumstances of the current Executive Head Teacher. Structuring schools around one key individual makes the organisation potentially vulnerable when that person leaves. If a Federation is desirable then wouldn’t a South Manchester Federation be preferable?

2. What is the advantage for Parrs Wood School of having a Governing Body that also serves two Trafford schools? The proposal for a single Governing Body for the three schools will mean that the two Trafford schools will hold the “balance of power”. There will be only five dedicated Parrs Wood Governors out of a total Governing Body of twenty five members. This means that Parrs Wood parents cannot be confident the new Governing Body will act in the best interests of Parrs Wood. The new Governing Body will have a duty to serve the interests of the Federation. There is nothing in the documentation to require a set number of Community Governors from Parrs Wood.

3. How will the new Governing Body have the time to give Parrs Wood, a particularly large school, the attention it needs? One Governing Body overseeing three schools (working across two Local Education Authorities) would be unwieldy. The sheer amount of business in these meetings will reduce the level of attention to detail Governors can give to the concerns of Parrs Wood.

11

4. How can a major change in the life of the School be justified at this time? Parrs Wood had a satisfactory Ofsted report; it has yet to achieve ‘outstanding’ status. The School acknowledges that there is further to go. What Parrs Wood needs is a period of stability with strong support from a full Governing Body representing parents, staff and community. The Federation idea is a distraction from dealing with the need to create this stability in Parrs Wood and retain a highly motivated staff team. The focus should be on getting the basics right around creating a happy and improving school. 5. How can staff work well together if some of them are expected to travel between two schools over eight miles apart? The Federation will create a two tier system of teachers with new teachers having to travel, between the schools which are over 13 km (8.2 miles) apart as required. This is not conducive to job satisfaction and the creation of high performing teams of staff in each subject group. We believe that there is a risk that even more staff will leave if the proposal is implemented with consequent damaging impact on our children’s education. Also, staff will be less familiar with Parrs Wood pupils because they (the staff) will be working across different sites rather than as part of one united school closely connected to its community.

Our conclusion is that any potential benefits of the Federation as argued in the leaflet are considerably outweighed by the serious issues listed above. As suggested earlier, if a Federation is considered necessary surely it should be between the main feeder primary schools in South Manchester and Parrs Wood High School? Finally, we have concerns about the consultation and decision-making process about the Federation proposal. When Parrs Wood went into ‘Special Measures’ the School’s Governing Body was replaced by a much smaller “Interim Executive Board”. This group does not have the levels of community, staff or parent representation that more traditional governing bodies have. It cannot, therefore, represent the wide range of interests and views that are included in normal governing bodies. In order to ensure this Interim Executive Board makes a decision in the best interests of the School they need to be made fully aware of parents’ views. Therefore we wish to collect the views of as many Parrs Wood parents as possible in a brief online survey. The link to the survey is below. We are also calling for a public meeting about this issue. Parents and carers invited to take part in the survey The survey is open to any parent or carer who has a child at the school or who has a child due to start in September 2010. Generally up to two carers or parents can complete the survey for a set of siblings. In order to ensure only people who are eligible to complete the survey do so, you will be asked to provide your contact details, the names of your children and the school year they are in. We need this information to ensure the Governors take the survey seriously. The survey is being managed by the parents named below and only these four parents and S.Evason will have access to your detailed information. S. Evason will be provided details as he/she is on named as coordinating the consultation for the schools in the proposal leaflet and he/she may wish to check that the survey is reliable. Please note we will not let S. Evason know details of who said what or how people voted in the survey.

12

All detailed data will be erased once the final decision has been taken about the Federation Proposal (information will be retained until the completion of any appeals process). A summary of the findings will be presented to:

• the Governing Bodies of all the schools involved • the person coordinating the consultation • the Local Education Authorities • other interested parties

All those completing the survey will also be emailed a copy. We have set up an email address that you can contact us on if you would like any further information about the survey. The address is parrswoodfuture@gmail.com. To complete the survey please use following link: http://tinyurl.com//Parrswoodfuture The parents coordinating this survey are:- � Helen Sharman – Children in year 9 and 13 � Julie Wilkinson – Child in year 10 and one child who has recently left the Sixth Form � Marlene Brennand - Children in year 9 and 13 � Abigail Sterne – Children in year 8 and 10 (and one due to start 2011)

13

Appendix 3 Comments made by parents The following comments are as written by the parents in the free text part of the survey with some grammar or spelling mistakes corrected for ease of reading. Also, in three cases, in the interests of protecting anonymity, comments that may identify parents and carers have been removed. Ref Comments Ref 011

I agree with all the points you have made. I'd like to add the following: Deep concerns that children with SEN/behaviour difficulties are being made to attend Broad Oak High School 8 miles away (and school pay taxi fares). Why can't Parrs Wood, the local school, meet these children's needs? There will be only 2 parent governors representing the whole student body. (An LA controlled primary school of 300 pupils has 5 parent governors). Under the proposed scheme, parent views will be severely under-represented. Parents are being given very limited access to the full proposal. Why isn't it online? In the first 'failed Ofsted' report, inspectors highlighted too many changes and a need for stability and consistency. Teachers can be directed to work at any school. Am I right in thinking Parrs Wood is much better funded than the Trafford schools? - Could this be 'siphoned off'?

Ref 012

As we only have an interim executive board and not a representative governing body as in other schools there needs to be a more transparent representation from teachers, parents, pupils who have Parrs Wood High School’s best interests. I also feel an open forum for parents should be a requirement in this process.

Ref 014

Would prefer local representation. Don't understand what connection we have with the Trafford Schools.

Ref 016

It seems to be a proposal based primarily on the career choices of the executive head teacher. It's not a natural fit for Parrs Wood itself. Parrs Wood is a big school, and it seems misguided to dilute the power and accountability of the governing body by removing it from the community it serves and combining it with two schools with which we have little or no connection. I share the criticisms outlined in the accompanying email to this survey. There should be an immediate public meeting/consultation with parents before any action is taken by the school.

Ref 017

My main comment is that there seems little in common between the schools other than the Executive Head teacher. I have real concerns about the sustainability of the arrangement and the impact it will have on Parrs Wood’s accountability to its local community.

Ref 018

It seems to be making an already large school, bigger and even more impersonal.

Ref 019

Parrs Wood School is big enough already. It should have a dedicated head-teacher. What are the economies of scale that are going to arise from creating this federation?

Ref 020

I believe there is a need to discuss the proposal at a public forum, before I can decide whether to support / otherwise the proposal.

Ref 021

No obvious community or geographical link with Trafford. Local politics are very different. I value the Labour controlled local government in Manchester and have no desire to have a different political influence. Trafford has the 11 + and Manchester does not. That is why I live in Manchester. To its credit, Parrs Wood is truly comprehensive, a mixed ability school and takes students from a broad community in South Manchester. It has just come out of special measures and one of its remaining weaknesses, is the governing/management structure. There has been an interim governing structure for the recent years and I feel that Parrs Wood needs to consolidate around its own community, with local primary schools, parents and students, with its own local authority, local business and enterprises. I am not convinced that the Hard Federation has anything to offer Parrs Wood. I am concerned that the proposal is a means to retain the exec head

14

Ref Comments and feel disappointed. It is a bit shabby. We care about Parrs Wood and believe we should look at the whole of what Parrs Wood needs for a sustainable future, rather than twisting it in the direction of a sole person or small group of unrepresentative people. What do the staff at Parrs Wood think about the proposals? What do the Trafford staff, parents and students think about being linked with a South Manchester school - or is the expectation that Parrs Wood will just have to conform to an unrepresentative governing structure? No, I do not support the proposal.

Ref 022

I think the proposed Hard Federation of Parrs Wood School and two schools in Trafford adds very little benefit to the pupils of Parrs Wood and its local catchment area. I am interested in seeing Parrs Wood respond effectively and well to the pupils it serves. It has only just come out of special measures and needs to focus on building on this achievement and not be distracted by the management of two other schools. I would like to see the expansion of the current Board of Governors, a real focus on improving the schools out puts and the building up of strong community involvement with the school.

Ref 023

I'm not persuaded that there would be significant advantages to the students or the staff. A glossy brochure doesn't work for me. If the long-serving senior staff at Parrs Wood were all in favour I'd back them (over the opinions of parents) but at the moment I am not persuaded.

Ref 025

I can see no real benefits to children or staff at Parrs Wood. Continuity of teaching would be lost if teachers have to travel between 2 sites in different areas that couldn't be further apart. Parrswood may be one of the "best" secondary schools in Manchester but as the ofsted report was ok it certainly wasn't good and there is huge room for improvement. I feel that resources and planning should be made to improve the school.

Ref 026

This is a dreadful idea !!!

Ref 027

1) The new coalition government wants parents to have choice in education; to be able to set-up their own schools. However, most PWHS students and parents have no choice about which school they go to. Surely parents should have choice about how the school is run. The decision to federate will be made by the governing bodies of the schools - not by the parents. The governing body at PWHS is not representative of parent opinion - this survey should demonstrate that.

Ref 030

I can't see the need for a hard federation. It does sound as though it has been suggested to keep the executive head in a significant (and presumably costly) role for all 3 schools

Ref 031

I am concerned that a Federation would not be in the best interests of the Parrs Wood community. It does not seem to be a natural union geographically, and I am concerned that one governing body would not be able to represent the interests of Parrs Wood pupils, teachers and parents.

Ref 033

The only thing these three schools have in common are the fact that they teach children and are led by Tarun Kapur. Parrs Wood is a comprehensive, with a sixth form and a very diverse intake, neither of the other schools are. One of the main problems at Parrs Wood is its size - this proposal will only exacerbate these issues and with the proposal to have staff work across all 3 schools the chances of them getting to know our children for the individuals they are negligible. I see this as a complete abdication of responsibility by Manchester City Council to whom we all pay our Council Tax.

Ref 034

I am extremely concerned that this proposal will marginalise parental voice within Parrs Wood and that it is only because of concerned parents of children already at the school that I as a parent of a child due to join in September, even know about the proposal.

Ref 037

I feel that since the school was put into special measures I have had almost no representation at the school to change any aspect of my children’s education. This new "federation" will only make this worse. I surely have the right to have a meaningful input into how my children are educated; this federation is simply a vehicle for Tarun Kapur to control three schools and to isolate the parents from each of the schools. There is absolutely no reason to join these schools together, the benefits of this federation are

15

Ref Comments negligible, yet the voice of both parents and students will be lost. Parents have never had a say in the appointment of Tarun Kapur and to further exacerbate this with the joining of a school that is too large with two others is a ridiculous idea that if it was put to a full Parrs Wood Governing body would never gain support. Why is Manchester City Council allowing this to happen? If they want this to go through then surely Tarun Kapur needs to go through a selection process in which the parents have a democratic say, as they would if there were a governing body involved in the appointment.

Ref 040

It appears to be a completely unworkable proposal. It appears to be in the headmaster's interest only not the pupils who have endured a lot of changes at the school in recent years.

Ref 041

The Federation is not one between schools in one community; it is not possible for a joint Governing Body covering 3 different communities to look after the interests of Parrs Wood students and staff; I think the school went into special measures because of poor governance and decision making, we need to strengthen the Governing Body not weaken it; I have been a Governor of a local primary school of 240 pupils and you need good communication even at that level, I don't see how a few Governors can seriously be expected to act as 'critical friend' in the intimidating setting of a Joint Governing Body; it puts far too much power into the hands of the Executive Head, this is a very vulnerable position to be in. I can't help thinking this is a paper exercise and the decision has already been made, if this is the case it could be a breaking of the school since this would lead to a serious loss of confidence by middle class parents who already feel they are being very trusting with their children's education. Manchester cannot afford this mistake and we cannot afford this mistake.

Ref 043

I am particularly unhappy about the involvement of businesses in the school. I don't believe a hard federation is in the best interests of the children.

Ref 044

The schools involved are in separate communities. If a Federation is desirable then wouldn’t a South Manchester Federation be preferable? The Federation idea is actually a distraction from dealing with the need to create stability in Parrs Wood and retain a highly motivated staff team. The focus should be on getting the basics right around creating a happy and improving school.

Ref 045

The cons for this arrangement are so significant that I am disappointed that Parrs Wood School is even considering this move. The School needs an effective, committed Governing Body with good parental representation which is primarily interested in developing this school. Teachers need to be employed for one school and expected to try their utmost in that school, for those children and for their careers within that school. Moving on occasions to other schools is non sensical. Joining with another secondary and a primary school in another borough, with no natural connection seems to be entirely ludicrous. This Federation idea should be stopped immediately and all those within the school concentrate on becoming a flagship school in Manchester again and giving our children the outstanding education they deserve.

Ref 047

I agree with the concerns and issues highlighted by the parents group. I personally cannot see any value in linking Parrs wood with the two schools in Trafford. This proposal should not be supported. I feel it will result in falling standard of education.

Ref 048

Concern about having one governing body for 3 schools

Ref 051

Economies of scale would not counteract problems of scale

Ref 053

Overall there do not appear to be advantages for PW students for this proposal. The other schools are in a different LEA, possibly have a different student body in terms of ability range (given 11 plus system); economies of scale mean fewer teachers/resources i.e. they will be spread over a large group of student; PW needs it own governing body; PW is already too big

Ref The validity if the Interim Executive Board making this decision is questionable. When the

16

Ref Comments 054 school went into Special Measures a Shadow Governing Body was supposed to be put in

place to take over when the school came out of special measures. This never happened and the fact that the IEB is still in place two and a half years later with no information in the public domain about its decision making processes is highly questionable.

Ref 055

I share some of the concerns outlined in the background email to this survey. I think PW needs stability and I’m not sure this proposed change would help deliver that.

Ref 056

I agree with the concerns raised. A school of this size needs to concentrate on the many issues that arise on a regular basis and not be distracted and marginalised by being swallowed up in this federation.

Ref 057

Does not seem to be in any way a natural linkage, would be better with local schools if needed

Ref 058

I am concerned that the only purpose of this proposal is to support the current management of the school. Trafford still operates a selective system and therefore is not comparable to Manchester schools with completely none selective entry. This is not a natural fit and could cause many problems in the future with conflicts of interest between the two Education Authorities.

Ref 059

The simple fact that this proposal brings together community schools in very different communities and locations make this proposal flawed. The drivers for this change are ambiguous and unclear. If the current Head at Parrswood HS feels he is not up to the job anymore then he should step aside. I call upon Manchester Education to review this proposal in light of the fact that Parrswood still has a vulnerable management structure that needs to maintain its focus to make Parrswood and outstanding school as opposed to just getting it out of special measures. I believe this proposal is a distraction and will not help in focussing minds and building on the work done thus far

Ref 061

I do not think this proposal is in the best interest of a community school serving the children and families of South Manchester

Ref 062

I have concerns that the proposal seems tailored to Mr Kapur's current role.

Ref 063

The proposal makes no sense from many perspectives but my main concern is that there is no connection between the communities the schools serve. This is an arrangement driven by short-term opportunism and the interests of the head teacher. I have a 10 year commitment to the future of the school. I want to see a partnership with legs or none at all.

Ref 068

I say no because there is not a 'don't know' option. I really do not know. The issue appears complex and unclear and I would like to be part of a balanced presentation / discussion of the proposal. Neither the school’s document nor the counter argument gives clarity.

Ref 069

So much disruption for the students especially those taking exams

Ref 070

I think it is the wrong thing to do. Parrswood is big enough as it is with a lot of behaviour problems and disruption in many classes

Ref 071

As the newsletter from the governors has said, I cannot see how a partnership between schools under different councils/areas can work. Also how can teachers be expected to travel so far between schools and keep the children's learning consistent

Ref 072

The proposal doesn't make any sense to me at all either as parent or as a senior manager in the public sector. Parrs Wood High School has little affinity with the two schools in Trafford. The school needs a dedicated, focussed governing body accountable to the local community.

Ref 073

I strongly oppose the proposed "Hard Federation". It servers no purpose which will benefit the PWHS community.

Ref 074

Would prefer Parrswood to retain independence and to have its own governing body. I am unhappy with a Manchester school linking with a school from a different geographical and political area. I am very concerned that the proposal has arisen due to current head's

17

Ref Comments association with Trafford.

Ref 075

Would like to retain Parr wood’s independence unhappy to link with two Trafford schools

Ref 077

There have been more than enough major changes to how the school is run. We now need a period of consolidation and stability to continue the improvement process. There's still a long way to go to bring the school back to the standard of a few years ago.

Ref 079

Extremely concerned about radical changes being made which do not seem to have any obvious benefits for the school and without the recognition of a current governing body

Ref 080

The glossy brochure suggests that this important proposal is a done deal. Have parents been consulted before now? I have concerns about Parrs Wood moving away from local authority control. Is this academy status? Who monitors standards? I have concerns about the interests of private sponsorship not always being in line with good educational provision. A federation would make more sense if using Parrs Wood feeder schools or Manchester LA high schools.

Ref 082

Parrs Wood has been through a huge period of change over the last number of years and needs time to consolidate for the benefit of existing staff and students.

Ref 083

There is no hard evidence that this is would be of any educational or pastoral benefit to Parrs Wood students.

Ref 084

The concerns raised by the parents' group are legitimate & I agree that any potential benefits are outweighed by potential pitfalls. Therefore, on balance, I would prefer that the formation of the federation did not go ahead. If it does, I believe that too much power over the governance of PW will rest in the hands of people not sufficiently informed about the nature of PW & its strengths & weaknesses nor intimately concerned for its pupils.

Ref 085

It isn't clear to me how Parrs Wood would benefit from a federation with schools in Trafford rather than local, South Manchester schools. On balance. Would see the federation disadvantaging Parrs Wood.

Ref 086

1. I have not heard any concrete explanation of the benefits to pupils at Parrs Wood School (or indeed the other schools in the proposed federation). 2. This kind of structure for schools is no longer advocated in Government education policy. It is possible that policy will turn against the idea of Federated Schools and will mean that structures have to be changed to meet new policy. It is ill-conceived to make a major change in the structure of the school when policies on Federated Schools are unclear. 3. It is entirely inappropriate that a decision on joining a federation should be made by an appointed board, rather than a governing body with elected staff and parental representatives. 4. The consultation process (in particular the failure to convene a public meeting and the misleading information in the consultation documentation) is a disgrace and will mean that consultees may not properly understand the issues that Federation raise.

Ref 087

I can see no clear articulation of the advantages of the federation it is just assumed to be a good idea. There are obvious disadvantages in terms of loss of accountability, potential conflicts of interests. Until a clear and persuasive case for federation is made I can not be in favour of this proposal.

Ref 088

There does not appear to be any real benefit for students in the proposal. We have just come out of special measures and the school should be focussing on making the school curriculum more interesting and engaging. Right now let’s focus on Parrs Wood and our getting the best out of our children. The added layer of administration seems cumbersome and not focussed on Parrs Wood but making the Federation work. Reducing the number of parent governors would only have the impact of a less local focus for Parrs Wood. I want a head teacher at Parrs Wood school to have the final say on what happens at the school and what the school focus is. Our school is a place where children can grow and learn it is not a business, it should not be overly bureaucratic. The School should be focussing on being the best community school in Manchester; there are plenty of opportunities to increase student involvement in community activities locally. There is no local benefit to having decisions made about the school. The Governing body structure

18

Ref Comments does not allow for equal representation from all schools so it would be possible for Parrs Wood to out voted on any issue. The proposal is too vague. For parents it is not possible to seem any concrete benefit to students or parents. Why not go for an agreement to work collectively on specific projects or procurement would allow for school independence to be maintained.

Ref 089

I am a school Governor and chair the 'Succession planning’ sub-committee in my school so am very familiar with the issues around leadership and federation. It seems to me that the case for a federation hinges on the closeness of vision, the similarities of delivery and ideally close geographical proximity. To quote the National College for school Leadership, they state the common themes for successful collaborations are •A common underlying ethos or loyalty (such as a faith). •A common employer of status (such as the local authority or diocese). •A real geographical community with a shared labour market. •A shared sense of urgency and priority. None of these seem to have been adequately addressed or evidenced by the proposal as set out.

Ref 090

I support this and think that it is a positive move.

Ref 091

I cannot see that it will benefit our children in any way - it seems we are barely out of special measures, are still only’ satisfactory' and Mr. Kapur's efforts should be focussed on improving this still poor performance rather than feathering his own career nest.

Ref 092

This seems to me to be a method for diluting our so far unsuccessful attempts to drag a once good school out of mediocrity. The school needs more governors and more inward-looking concern and effort to bring it out of being a poor 'satisfactory'.

Ref 093

Why not federate with a Manchester school closer to Parrswood

Ref 096

I think its a bad idea

Ref 098

Trafford schools are not part of our community

Ref 100

It is difficult to run such a large school as Parrs Wood as it is. The idea of 3 schools together is ridiculous- the logistics are stupid. I remember Burnage High on 2 sites - that posed enough problems as it was.

Ref 103

The school must focus on improving its existing educational provision, and I sense this move will inevitably distract from this. Teachers will be attracted to what they perceive to be the best school, perhaps to the detriment of Parrs Wood

Ref 104

The proposal is across two LEA's with different policies. Trafford still has Grammar schools with selective education. The two concerned schools proposed in Trafford are therefore not even representative of the area. It could make more sense if one of the schools was a grammar.

Ref 105

I would like to be clear about the benefits and risks of this move

Ref 108

The proposals contain no clarity as to how Parrs Wood would benefit from the Federation, just general phrasemaking about sharing of resources etc

Ref 109

The benefits of the Federation are unclear. The timeline to implement is aggressive. Why is a major change being rushed through in such a short time without any formal consultation with the community? Is this change in the interests of individuals over the collective interests of our children and community? Parrswood needs stability and continued focus on re-attaining the high standards it once enjoyed. We must continue to strive towards this goal, it is not apparent that a Federation would achieve this. We need to work with local feeder primary schools to regain confidence that Parrswood is the school of choice. Such an initiative is more worthy as it would help to halt the increasing migration of the community to other schools. Parrs Wood must be come the school of choice for all its local children.

Ref We have taken a massive step forward in getting out of special measures in a relatively

19

Ref Comments 110 short time. However more concentrated effort is needed to attain outstanding status.

This must be a specific objective for the school. Dividing attention between 3 schools that are not in the same area nor have the same needs is not the way forward. Focus must be placed on local measures such as improving links with local primary schools to improve confidence in Parrs Wood being the school of choice. The migration to other schools of local families must stop. The Federation will not help with these crucial aims.

Ref 111

1. Too much power in the hands of a few. 2. It's a federation across LEAs. 3. It's a federation across different educational systems e.g. secondary modern vs. comprehensive. 4. There is not enough local community involvement in management

Ref 113

How will Manchester school funding for Parrs Wood be ring-fenced/protected and not used to support the less well funded Trafford schools? I am not sure why Parrs Wood teaching staff would be working across the 3 sites. Where is the benefit for PW pupils?

Ref 114

After a number of years of uncertainty due to mis-management of the school, I feel that it now needs a prolonged period of stability. I do not feel that these proposals are beneficial to a Manchester school, which could easily find its funding compromised by involvement with Trafford schools, which are not are not they adequately funded by Trafford Education Authority.

Ref 115

I am deeply troubled by the fact that the parents with children starting in September 2010 were not told about the proposal by the school. I have grave concerns about the school being run by a body with only 5 Parrs Wood representatives. It also concerns me that the decision to create a Federation will be made by the interim executive board and not a governing body. If I had wanted my child to go to a school run by Trafford I would have sent them to Sale. Local School, Local Kids, Local Governance

116 False economies of scale at the expense of accountability to the pupils and parents of Parrs Wood High School

117 A governing body of 25 is unlikely to achieve anything 118 Although Parrs Wood is undoubtedly a very good school, the one criticism of it is often

that it is simply too big. Therefore, I have concerns about the school becoming part of an even larger organisation. I feel this could be quite overwhelming for a lot of the pupils.

119 This proposal is related to management convenience not educational improvement, the consultation document gives no information regarding for example how the Parrswood School Budget will be affected e.g., will monies from Parrswood be channelled into the other two schools ? the document also refers to educational benefits for the children but fails to provide any convincing examples, most worrying of all is the proposal regarding the Governing Body membership which will actually put Parrswood parents and indeed all the parents on the Governing Body in the minority, this is completely contrary to Government Strategy which is to place parents at the core of school improvement and working in partnership with managers and educationalists. In my view a full and frank disclosure of the implications for this proposal should be included in a consultation document simply to issue a pamphlet with limited information is not acceptable and could be construed as paying lip service to the consultation process, in my view this very significant proposal needs more time for consideration, in addition our local councillors and our recently re elected M.P. have been very quiet on the matter and we should now seek to involve them actively in campaigning against this proposal

120 More consultation is needed