Poor comprehensives blamed on poverty, leadership - and grammar schools

Futures Community College in Southend

Futures Community College in Southend

First published in Local News by

POVERTY, poor leadership, a lack of parental ambition and the grammar school system have been blamed for the poor performance of Southend Council’s secondary schools.

Ofsted rates all Southend’s nine academies, except St Thomas More High School, as “good” or “outstanding” and all, except Shoebury High School, score higher than the national average for good GCSE results.

But Chase High School, Futures Community College and Cecil Jones College, which are all funded through the council, are trailing far behind.

Chase High School was downgraded to “inadequate”, the lowest Ofsted ranking, in December after the proportion of its pupils achieving five good GCSEs graded A* to C, including maths and English, fell from 40 to 25 per cent last year.

Stephen Capper resigned as headteacher of Futures Community College, where 27 per cent of pupils achieved good grades last year, in October, after Ofsted said the school was inadequate and not improving.

Cecil Jones College achieved a “satisfactory” rating in 2012, which would be “requires improvement” after Ofsted toughened up its rating system in September 2012, after being put into special measures in 2009. A third of its pupils – 34 per cent – got five GCSEs graded A* to C, including maths and English, last year.

James Courtenay, Southend councillor responsible for education and learning, said: “Those results need to improve, hence we are putting additional funding in.

“Those schools are the ones of concern.

“Ratings of good or outstanding are more of a long-term aim, but I want kids coming out with good GCSEs.

“There have been serious fluctuations in GCSE results in the wrong direction.

“We want to see an ongoing, considerable rise.”

The Conservative blamed the performance gap between the academies and the local-authority- funded comprehensives on a number of factors, including the grammar school system.

All but three of the nine academies have some form of selection and Mr Courtenay admitted the town’s four grammar schools “cream off” the top pupils.

In December, Ashley Eastwood, headteacher of the Federation of Greenways Schools, in Thorpe Bay, said too many parents put children forward for the 11-plus in a bid to avoid the local-authority-funded comprehensives.

But Mr Courtenay said having half of Essex’s eight grammar schools in the borough benefits Southend as historically up to a quarter of all grammar places in the county were taken by the towns pupils.

Out of the 608 places at the town’s four grammar schools 470 are reserved for pupils from Southend primary schools who pass the 11-plus – but just 197 gained places starting last September.

Mr Courtenay said: “The performance gap is down to the context with the grammar schools – it’s a different intake when you cream off 20 per cent.

“It’s also the different approach to the curriculum and exams, it’s the aspiration of the children and families, it’s the environment, it’s the leadership and governance and the ability to attract good teachers – all those need to be right to make it a good school.”

Comments (17)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:06pm Thu 20 Feb 14

carnmountyouknowitmakessense says...

Funny how they choose to ignore the core issues of poor results,Teaching methods and a lack of standards. Next someone will be suggesting a bereavement tainted the schools ability to pass the grade, Oh they already have...
Funny how they choose to ignore the core issues of poor results,Teaching methods and a lack of standards. Next someone will be suggesting a bereavement tainted the schools ability to pass the grade, Oh they already have... carnmountyouknowitmakessense
  • Score: 10

5:21pm Thu 20 Feb 14

Jack222 says...

Actually all the studies show that the strongest predictor - by far - of how a child does at school is home background.

In the old days it was simple - the mother's educational background (when she stayed at home) was the biggest predictor of how the child achieved at secondary school. Why? She stayed at home and 'taught' the child - read books with it, talked intelligently with the child. took it places and so on if it was from a middle class background.

It's still true today - the strongest predictor of if a child will go to University is if a parent has been to University. Why? It's the home - the books actively used, the films watched and talked about, it's the museums and art galleries that middle class parents take their children to, it's the holidays to Egypt to see the Pyramids and so on. Work out your own working class stereotype (quality of language exposure? Books? Holidays? Museums?)...

The school is merely a paper chase - tick these boxes to get a qualification. The home wins in every academic study.

But politicians don't like pointing out that overall poor - and poorly educated - parents have children who will not succeed at school as these parents vote.
Actually all the studies show that the strongest predictor - by far - of how a child does at school is home background. In the old days it was simple - the mother's educational background (when she stayed at home) was the biggest predictor of how the child achieved at secondary school. Why? She stayed at home and 'taught' the child - read books with it, talked intelligently with the child. took it places and so on if it was from a middle class background. It's still true today - the strongest predictor of if a child will go to University is if a parent has been to University. Why? It's the home - the books actively used, the films watched and talked about, it's the museums and art galleries that middle class parents take their children to, it's the holidays to Egypt to see the Pyramids and so on. Work out your own working class stereotype (quality of language exposure? Books? Holidays? Museums?)... The school is merely a paper chase - tick these boxes to get a qualification. The home wins in every academic study. But politicians don't like pointing out that overall poor - and poorly educated - parents have children who will not succeed at school as these parents vote. Jack222
  • Score: 21

6:27pm Thu 20 Feb 14

Kim Gandy says...

Jack222 wrote:
Actually all the studies show that the strongest predictor - by far - of how a child does at school is home background.

In the old days it was simple - the mother's educational background (when she stayed at home) was the biggest predictor of how the child achieved at secondary school. Why? She stayed at home and 'taught' the child - read books with it, talked intelligently with the child. took it places and so on if it was from a middle class background.

It's still true today - the strongest predictor of if a child will go to University is if a parent has been to University. Why? It's the home - the books actively used, the films watched and talked about, it's the museums and art galleries that middle class parents take their children to, it's the holidays to Egypt to see the Pyramids and so on. Work out your own working class stereotype (quality of language exposure? Books? Holidays? Museums?)...

The school is merely a paper chase - tick these boxes to get a qualification. The home wins in every academic study.

But politicians don't like pointing out that overall poor - and poorly educated - parents have children who will not succeed at school as these parents vote.
I taught both my children to read and write before they went to school.

Even as babies I engaged them in fun games and puzzles, as pre-reading skills. When out with them I encouraged them to read signage and encouraged their observational skills. Even shopping was interactive, pointing at and naming things, reading numbers on prices etc etc.

I also included the kind of reading matter I read as a child, having, as I do, a large collection of original Ladybird classics. Not favoured by today's PC wallahs but excellent for learning to read. And I used contemporary material too.

It's a real pleasure to be able to start your child's education yourself. My children were both reading above their reading age in class when they did start school and I have always been on hand for homework, encouraged them to go on school trips and get involved with activities.

I have always encouraged them to discuss and debate things and question anything they think is not right.

A child's education is not just the responsibility of the education system and there was no way I was going to have my children educated entirely by the State with no input from me at all.

I still hold that view: always will.
[quote][p][bold]Jack222[/bold] wrote: Actually all the studies show that the strongest predictor - by far - of how a child does at school is home background. In the old days it was simple - the mother's educational background (when she stayed at home) was the biggest predictor of how the child achieved at secondary school. Why? She stayed at home and 'taught' the child - read books with it, talked intelligently with the child. took it places and so on if it was from a middle class background. It's still true today - the strongest predictor of if a child will go to University is if a parent has been to University. Why? It's the home - the books actively used, the films watched and talked about, it's the museums and art galleries that middle class parents take their children to, it's the holidays to Egypt to see the Pyramids and so on. Work out your own working class stereotype (quality of language exposure? Books? Holidays? Museums?)... The school is merely a paper chase - tick these boxes to get a qualification. The home wins in every academic study. But politicians don't like pointing out that overall poor - and poorly educated - parents have children who will not succeed at school as these parents vote.[/p][/quote]I taught both my children to read and write before they went to school. Even as babies I engaged them in fun games and puzzles, as pre-reading skills. When out with them I encouraged them to read signage and encouraged their observational skills. Even shopping was interactive, pointing at and naming things, reading numbers on prices etc etc. I also included the kind of reading matter I read as a child, having, as I do, a large collection of original Ladybird classics. Not favoured by today's PC wallahs but excellent for learning to read. And I used contemporary material too. It's a real pleasure to be able to start your child's education yourself. My children were both reading above their reading age in class when they did start school and I have always been on hand for homework, encouraged them to go on school trips and get involved with activities. I have always encouraged them to discuss and debate things and question anything they think is not right. A child's education is not just the responsibility of the education system and there was no way I was going to have my children educated entirely by the State with no input from me at all. I still hold that view: always will. Kim Gandy
  • Score: 12

6:40pm Thu 20 Feb 14

carnmountyouknowitmakessense says...

Kim Gandy wrote:
Jack222 wrote:
Actually all the studies show that the strongest predictor - by far - of how a child does at school is home background.

In the old days it was simple - the mother's educational background (when she stayed at home) was the biggest predictor of how the child achieved at secondary school. Why? She stayed at home and 'taught' the child - read books with it, talked intelligently with the child. took it places and so on if it was from a middle class background.

It's still true today - the strongest predictor of if a child will go to University is if a parent has been to University. Why? It's the home - the books actively used, the films watched and talked about, it's the museums and art galleries that middle class parents take their children to, it's the holidays to Egypt to see the Pyramids and so on. Work out your own working class stereotype (quality of language exposure? Books? Holidays? Museums?)...

The school is merely a paper chase - tick these boxes to get a qualification. The home wins in every academic study.

But politicians don't like pointing out that overall poor - and poorly educated - parents have children who will not succeed at school as these parents vote.
I taught both my children to read and write before they went to school.

Even as babies I engaged them in fun games and puzzles, as pre-reading skills. When out with them I encouraged them to read signage and encouraged their observational skills. Even shopping was interactive, pointing at and naming things, reading numbers on prices etc etc.

I also included the kind of reading matter I read as a child, having, as I do, a large collection of original Ladybird classics. Not favoured by today's PC wallahs but excellent for learning to read. And I used contemporary material too.

It's a real pleasure to be able to start your child's education yourself. My children were both reading above their reading age in class when they did start school and I have always been on hand for homework, encouraged them to go on school trips and get involved with activities.

I have always encouraged them to discuss and debate things and question anything they think is not right.

A child's education is not just the responsibility of the education system and there was no way I was going to have my children educated entirely by the State with no input from me at all.

I still hold that view: always will.
Trouble is you did did that 30 years ago, things are a little different, in the 21st century
[quote][p][bold]Kim Gandy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jack222[/bold] wrote: Actually all the studies show that the strongest predictor - by far - of how a child does at school is home background. In the old days it was simple - the mother's educational background (when she stayed at home) was the biggest predictor of how the child achieved at secondary school. Why? She stayed at home and 'taught' the child - read books with it, talked intelligently with the child. took it places and so on if it was from a middle class background. It's still true today - the strongest predictor of if a child will go to University is if a parent has been to University. Why? It's the home - the books actively used, the films watched and talked about, it's the museums and art galleries that middle class parents take their children to, it's the holidays to Egypt to see the Pyramids and so on. Work out your own working class stereotype (quality of language exposure? Books? Holidays? Museums?)... The school is merely a paper chase - tick these boxes to get a qualification. The home wins in every academic study. But politicians don't like pointing out that overall poor - and poorly educated - parents have children who will not succeed at school as these parents vote.[/p][/quote]I taught both my children to read and write before they went to school. Even as babies I engaged them in fun games and puzzles, as pre-reading skills. When out with them I encouraged them to read signage and encouraged their observational skills. Even shopping was interactive, pointing at and naming things, reading numbers on prices etc etc. I also included the kind of reading matter I read as a child, having, as I do, a large collection of original Ladybird classics. Not favoured by today's PC wallahs but excellent for learning to read. And I used contemporary material too. It's a real pleasure to be able to start your child's education yourself. My children were both reading above their reading age in class when they did start school and I have always been on hand for homework, encouraged them to go on school trips and get involved with activities. I have always encouraged them to discuss and debate things and question anything they think is not right. A child's education is not just the responsibility of the education system and there was no way I was going to have my children educated entirely by the State with no input from me at all. I still hold that view: always will.[/p][/quote]Trouble is you did did that 30 years ago, things are a little different, in the 21st century carnmountyouknowitmakessense
  • Score: -10

7:23pm Thu 20 Feb 14

whataday says...

Kim Gandy wrote:
Jack222 wrote:
Actually all the studies show that the strongest predictor - by far - of how a child does at school is home background.

In the old days it was simple - the mother's educational background (when she stayed at home) was the biggest predictor of how the child achieved at secondary school. Why? She stayed at home and 'taught' the child - read books with it, talked intelligently with the child. took it places and so on if it was from a middle class background.

It's still true today - the strongest predictor of if a child will go to University is if a parent has been to University. Why? It's the home - the books actively used, the films watched and talked about, it's the museums and art galleries that middle class parents take their children to, it's the holidays to Egypt to see the Pyramids and so on. Work out your own working class stereotype (quality of language exposure? Books? Holidays? Museums?)...

The school is merely a paper chase - tick these boxes to get a qualification. The home wins in every academic study.

But politicians don't like pointing out that overall poor - and poorly educated - parents have children who will not succeed at school as these parents vote.
I taught both my children to read and write before they went to school.

Even as babies I engaged them in fun games and puzzles, as pre-reading skills. When out with them I encouraged them to read signage and encouraged their observational skills. Even shopping was interactive, pointing at and naming things, reading numbers on prices etc etc.

I also included the kind of reading matter I read as a child, having, as I do, a large collection of original Ladybird classics. Not favoured by today's PC wallahs but excellent for learning to read. And I used contemporary material too.

It's a real pleasure to be able to start your child's education yourself. My children were both reading above their reading age in class when they did start school and I have always been on hand for homework, encouraged them to go on school trips and get involved with activities.

I have always encouraged them to discuss and debate things and question anything they think is not right.

A child's education is not just the responsibility of the education system and there was no way I was going to have my children educated entirely by the State with no input from me at all.

I still hold that view: always will.
Exactly - if parents actively participate in their child's learning either through play, formally or as you have done then the child can be encouraged to reach their full educational potential. If the parents aren't interested then little chance their children will be
[quote][p][bold]Kim Gandy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jack222[/bold] wrote: Actually all the studies show that the strongest predictor - by far - of how a child does at school is home background. In the old days it was simple - the mother's educational background (when she stayed at home) was the biggest predictor of how the child achieved at secondary school. Why? She stayed at home and 'taught' the child - read books with it, talked intelligently with the child. took it places and so on if it was from a middle class background. It's still true today - the strongest predictor of if a child will go to University is if a parent has been to University. Why? It's the home - the books actively used, the films watched and talked about, it's the museums and art galleries that middle class parents take their children to, it's the holidays to Egypt to see the Pyramids and so on. Work out your own working class stereotype (quality of language exposure? Books? Holidays? Museums?)... The school is merely a paper chase - tick these boxes to get a qualification. The home wins in every academic study. But politicians don't like pointing out that overall poor - and poorly educated - parents have children who will not succeed at school as these parents vote.[/p][/quote]I taught both my children to read and write before they went to school. Even as babies I engaged them in fun games and puzzles, as pre-reading skills. When out with them I encouraged them to read signage and encouraged their observational skills. Even shopping was interactive, pointing at and naming things, reading numbers on prices etc etc. I also included the kind of reading matter I read as a child, having, as I do, a large collection of original Ladybird classics. Not favoured by today's PC wallahs but excellent for learning to read. And I used contemporary material too. It's a real pleasure to be able to start your child's education yourself. My children were both reading above their reading age in class when they did start school and I have always been on hand for homework, encouraged them to go on school trips and get involved with activities. I have always encouraged them to discuss and debate things and question anything they think is not right. A child's education is not just the responsibility of the education system and there was no way I was going to have my children educated entirely by the State with no input from me at all. I still hold that view: always will.[/p][/quote]Exactly - if parents actively participate in their child's learning either through play, formally or as you have done then the child can be encouraged to reach their full educational potential. If the parents aren't interested then little chance their children will be whataday
  • Score: 10

7:23pm Thu 20 Feb 14

GrumpyofLeigh says...

Renaming them all "Secondary Modern" might help then we all know where we stand. In what respect is "Chase High" deemed "High"? Or does that just reflect how much of our dosh went into its overhaul?
Renaming them all "Secondary Modern" might help then we all know where we stand. In what respect is "Chase High" deemed "High"? Or does that just reflect how much of our dosh went into its overhaul? GrumpyofLeigh
  • Score: 1

7:24pm Thu 20 Feb 14

whataday says...

carnmountyouknowitma
kessense
wrote:
Kim Gandy wrote:
Jack222 wrote:
Actually all the studies show that the strongest predictor - by far - of how a child does at school is home background.

In the old days it was simple - the mother's educational background (when she stayed at home) was the biggest predictor of how the child achieved at secondary school. Why? She stayed at home and 'taught' the child - read books with it, talked intelligently with the child. took it places and so on if it was from a middle class background.

It's still true today - the strongest predictor of if a child will go to University is if a parent has been to University. Why? It's the home - the books actively used, the films watched and talked about, it's the museums and art galleries that middle class parents take their children to, it's the holidays to Egypt to see the Pyramids and so on. Work out your own working class stereotype (quality of language exposure? Books? Holidays? Museums?)...

The school is merely a paper chase - tick these boxes to get a qualification. The home wins in every academic study.

But politicians don't like pointing out that overall poor - and poorly educated - parents have children who will not succeed at school as these parents vote.
I taught both my children to read and write before they went to school.

Even as babies I engaged them in fun games and puzzles, as pre-reading skills. When out with them I encouraged them to read signage and encouraged their observational skills. Even shopping was interactive, pointing at and naming things, reading numbers on prices etc etc.

I also included the kind of reading matter I read as a child, having, as I do, a large collection of original Ladybird classics. Not favoured by today's PC wallahs but excellent for learning to read. And I used contemporary material too.

It's a real pleasure to be able to start your child's education yourself. My children were both reading above their reading age in class when they did start school and I have always been on hand for homework, encouraged them to go on school trips and get involved with activities.

I have always encouraged them to discuss and debate things and question anything they think is not right.

A child's education is not just the responsibility of the education system and there was no way I was going to have my children educated entirely by the State with no input from me at all.

I still hold that view: always will.
Trouble is you did did that 30 years ago, things are a little different, in the 21st century
Sorry don't really see how things are different in the 21st century. If parents attitude is to encourage learning it doesn't matter which century you are discussing.
[quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kim Gandy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jack222[/bold] wrote: Actually all the studies show that the strongest predictor - by far - of how a child does at school is home background. In the old days it was simple - the mother's educational background (when she stayed at home) was the biggest predictor of how the child achieved at secondary school. Why? She stayed at home and 'taught' the child - read books with it, talked intelligently with the child. took it places and so on if it was from a middle class background. It's still true today - the strongest predictor of if a child will go to University is if a parent has been to University. Why? It's the home - the books actively used, the films watched and talked about, it's the museums and art galleries that middle class parents take their children to, it's the holidays to Egypt to see the Pyramids and so on. Work out your own working class stereotype (quality of language exposure? Books? Holidays? Museums?)... The school is merely a paper chase - tick these boxes to get a qualification. The home wins in every academic study. But politicians don't like pointing out that overall poor - and poorly educated - parents have children who will not succeed at school as these parents vote.[/p][/quote]I taught both my children to read and write before they went to school. Even as babies I engaged them in fun games and puzzles, as pre-reading skills. When out with them I encouraged them to read signage and encouraged their observational skills. Even shopping was interactive, pointing at and naming things, reading numbers on prices etc etc. I also included the kind of reading matter I read as a child, having, as I do, a large collection of original Ladybird classics. Not favoured by today's PC wallahs but excellent for learning to read. And I used contemporary material too. It's a real pleasure to be able to start your child's education yourself. My children were both reading above their reading age in class when they did start school and I have always been on hand for homework, encouraged them to go on school trips and get involved with activities. I have always encouraged them to discuss and debate things and question anything they think is not right. A child's education is not just the responsibility of the education system and there was no way I was going to have my children educated entirely by the State with no input from me at all. I still hold that view: always will.[/p][/quote]Trouble is you did did that 30 years ago, things are a little different, in the 21st century[/p][/quote]Sorry don't really see how things are different in the 21st century. If parents attitude is to encourage learning it doesn't matter which century you are discussing. whataday
  • Score: 8

8:34pm Thu 20 Feb 14

stopmoaning1 says...

Mr Courtenay admitted the town’s four grammar schools “cream off” the top pupils.

What a completely ridiculous argument.
The 11 plus is open to every single year 6 student. If they are bright enough to pass, they get the grammar place.

What really needs to be done instead of blaming everything on the brighter children, is to take the necessary steps to improve the other schools.
Lets bring the standards UP instead of trying to get rid of the grammar's.

Does anybody know what qualifications Mr Courtney has to make him suitable for such an important role, as he clearly has no idea.
Mr Courtenay admitted the town’s four grammar schools “cream off” the top pupils. What a completely ridiculous argument. The 11 plus is open to every single year 6 student. If they are bright enough to pass, they get the grammar place. What really needs to be done instead of blaming everything on the brighter children, is to take the necessary steps to improve the other schools. Lets bring the standards UP instead of trying to get rid of the grammar's. Does anybody know what qualifications Mr Courtney has to make him suitable for such an important role, as he clearly has no idea. stopmoaning1
  • Score: 9

8:56pm Thu 20 Feb 14

leavingonajetplane says...

I have to say that, education in Southend (in my opinion) is about gaining a leadership position and gaining yourself a nice promotion and hitting Government targets; not teaching students.

A good case in point. The bloodbath that is Futures. The public is unaware that there is now almost no teacher, except a few supply teachers, in all core subjects. In English, there is 1 teacher for 8 positions, with 7 being supply or positions being open. We are slowly getting back to the 1998 situation. On the other hand, there is no lack of leadership positions filled, with money being spent on what ever new prat appears to lead the sinking and stinking ship.
I have to say that, education in Southend (in my opinion) is about gaining a leadership position and gaining yourself a nice promotion and hitting Government targets; not teaching students. A good case in point. The bloodbath that is Futures. The public is unaware that there is now almost no teacher, except a few supply teachers, in all core subjects. In English, there is 1 teacher for 8 positions, with 7 being supply or positions being open. We are slowly getting back to the 1998 situation. On the other hand, there is no lack of leadership positions filled, with money being spent on what ever new prat appears to lead the sinking and stinking ship. leavingonajetplane
  • Score: 6

10:04pm Thu 20 Feb 14

Nebs says...

Under Labour recommend homework was an hour a week for five to seven-year-olds, rising to 2.5 hours per night for pupils aged between 14 and 16.
Mr Gove changed this, and now it is up to headmasters to decide on the appropriate amount (if any).
Perhaps all the local schools could be asked to publish their homework policy.
Under Labour recommend homework was an hour a week for five to seven-year-olds, rising to 2.5 hours per night for pupils aged between 14 and 16. Mr Gove changed this, and now it is up to headmasters to decide on the appropriate amount (if any). Perhaps all the local schools could be asked to publish their homework policy. Nebs
  • Score: 1

10:10pm Thu 20 Feb 14

leavingonajetplane says...

Ah, the change in Governments. lol. The reality is that I spent my time, where I would love loved to be only teaching, writing and re-writing curric to meet Govt set objectives over and over so many times that I made it back to where I started in Govt objectives several times (if that makes sense lol). In an area like Southend, most the work is simply trying to meet local and central edicts to make education look as good as you can, while the reality is simply managed and slightly improved on a daily basis.
Ah, the change in Governments. lol. The reality is that I spent my time, where I would love loved to be only teaching, writing and re-writing curric to meet Govt set objectives over and over so many times that I made it back to where I started in Govt objectives several times (if that makes sense lol). In an area like Southend, most the work is simply trying to meet local and central edicts to make education look as good as you can, while the reality is simply managed and slightly improved on a daily basis. leavingonajetplane
  • Score: -2

10:12pm Thu 20 Feb 14

leavingonajetplane says...

In Southend, there is a big exodus of anybody with skill who is not a political hack. Government budget levels also means that you end up with many unskilled or semi skilled, or teachers with no qualifications. Futures has adds out again trying to attract anyone around the world with any teaching qualifications!
In Southend, there is a big exodus of anybody with skill who is not a political hack. Government budget levels also means that you end up with many unskilled or semi skilled, or teachers with no qualifications. Futures has adds out again trying to attract anyone around the world with any teaching qualifications! leavingonajetplane
  • Score: 0

10:21pm Thu 20 Feb 14

bezzie says...

Having one child at Futures and one at Westcliff High - woah what a difference in education they both get! How they expect a child to pass maths at Futures is beyond me- and they dont even care. The disruption in some of the classes is shocking-they do nothing to improve this-but they are good at monitoring everything! They need to sack the teachers that cannot control the kids and segregate the kids that dont want to learn. Its been cover teachers after cover teacher for months in some subjects. The weak teachers give the few brilliant teachers a much harder task. My child is embarrassed to say they go to this school. They will never improve the exam results because they never seem to make any changes.
Having one child at Futures and one at Westcliff High - woah what a difference in education they both get! How they expect a child to pass maths at Futures is beyond me- and they dont even care. The disruption in some of the classes is shocking-they do nothing to improve this-but they are good at monitoring everything! They need to sack the teachers that cannot control the kids and segregate the kids that dont want to learn. Its been cover teachers after cover teacher for months in some subjects. The weak teachers give the few brilliant teachers a much harder task. My child is embarrassed to say they go to this school. They will never improve the exam results because they never seem to make any changes. bezzie
  • Score: 6

11:01pm Thu 20 Feb 14

leavingonajetplane says...

There are almost no locally qualified teachers in Maths, English or Science. If you use supply or term replacement supply teachers all they are is in a holding pattern! They are there to stop things getting to far out of control. There is very little actual teaching and the institution, that was Thorpe Bay, and now Futures is headed down again. The new building and money goes into the 14 plus rubbish designed to be a draw card by using the new building and showing it off. The Borough did such a bad job of the new building that it was not fit for purpose on the first day it was open! A great deal of money has since been spent making a new building that was meant to be the future of education, fit for the purpose that the Council spent so much money for. The only stable positions at Futures is the Senior Management as they get the perks and money. The place has always been used by aspiring Heads as a means to self promotion and promotion within upper teaching circles. One of the recent ones was sacked, sorry, read forced to resign, for hitting a student who used to run all over the roof of the school and wind up the staff.
There are almost no locally qualified teachers in Maths, English or Science. If you use supply or term replacement supply teachers all they are is in a holding pattern! They are there to stop things getting to far out of control. There is very little actual teaching and the institution, that was Thorpe Bay, and now Futures is headed down again. The new building and money goes into the 14 plus rubbish designed to be a draw card by using the new building and showing it off. The Borough did such a bad job of the new building that it was not fit for purpose on the first day it was open! A great deal of money has since been spent making a new building that was meant to be the future of education, fit for the purpose that the Council spent so much money for. The only stable positions at Futures is the Senior Management as they get the perks and money. The place has always been used by aspiring Heads as a means to self promotion and promotion within upper teaching circles. One of the recent ones was sacked, sorry, read forced to resign, for hitting a student who used to run all over the roof of the school and wind up the staff. leavingonajetplane
  • Score: 5

12:25am Fri 21 Feb 14

emcee says...

leavingonajetplane wrote:
I have to say that, education in Southend (in my opinion) is about gaining a leadership position and gaining yourself a nice promotion and hitting Government targets; not teaching students.

A good case in point. The bloodbath that is Futures. The public is unaware that there is now almost no teacher, except a few supply teachers, in all core subjects. In English, there is 1 teacher for 8 positions, with 7 being supply or positions being open. We are slowly getting back to the 1998 situation. On the other hand, there is no lack of leadership positions filled, with money being spent on what ever new prat appears to lead the sinking and stinking ship.
Actually you raise an important point. The leadership team are quite often in it for themselves. There is more often than not a ledership clique which is not only a closed door to their underlings but where school policy and ethos is set out to benefit them or their own departments. In many schools, the leadership agenda is firstly to ensure that they and the school are seen in a good light, before they even contemplate the annoyance of actually educating.
[quote][p][bold]leavingonajetplane[/bold] wrote: I have to say that, education in Southend (in my opinion) is about gaining a leadership position and gaining yourself a nice promotion and hitting Government targets; not teaching students. A good case in point. The bloodbath that is Futures. The public is unaware that there is now almost no teacher, except a few supply teachers, in all core subjects. In English, there is 1 teacher for 8 positions, with 7 being supply or positions being open. We are slowly getting back to the 1998 situation. On the other hand, there is no lack of leadership positions filled, with money being spent on what ever new prat appears to lead the sinking and stinking ship.[/p][/quote]Actually you raise an important point. The leadership team are quite often in it for themselves. There is more often than not a ledership clique which is not only a closed door to their underlings but where school policy and ethos is set out to benefit them or their own departments. In many schools, the leadership agenda is firstly to ensure that they and the school are seen in a good light, before they even contemplate the annoyance of actually educating. emcee
  • Score: 5

3:31pm Fri 21 Feb 14

jayman says...

I have but one point of blame... Southends administration...
I have but one point of blame... Southends administration... jayman
  • Score: 0

11:59pm Sun 23 Feb 14

leavingonajetplane says...

And yet another Headteacher full of pee and wind Jay!
And yet another Headteacher full of pee and wind Jay! leavingonajetplane
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree