Council minute

Minute of the council meeting of 5th March 2008.

Petition concerning Fir Vale, Parkwood and Firth Park Schools

“The Council received a petition organised by the North Sheffield Anti-Academies Alliance containing 320 signatures opposing current proposals to handover Fir Vale, Parkwood and Firth Park Schools to private business and expressing their belief that schools should remain accountable to elected Councillors, Governors and the community. Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made by Mick Ibbotson, who felt that the Council was selling off three good schools to private enterprise without much consultation. He urged the Council to reject the proposals to pursue academy status for Parkwood School, particularly when only 23 out of approximately 1,500 parents of children at the school and feeder schools had completed the questionnaires, with only 15 of those agreeing with the proposals.”

“The Council referred the petition to the Cabinet Member for Children’s Services (Councillor Harry Harpham) who declared that he had a child who attended the school but would have left by the time the proposals, if subsequently approved, came to fruition. He indicated that Parkwood School was one of the most improved secondary schools in the City but was still in the bottom 25% nationally. He referred to the good work being done at the school by the Headteacher, Chris Mallaband, who was working hard to help pupils fulfil their potential and felt that pursuing Academy status was the best thing that could be done to raise the aspirations of young children in the community. He emphasised that, as the Headteacher and the School Governors had asked the Council for the possibility of academy status to be pursued, it would have been wrong for the Council to deny such request, which was why the consultation had been initiated.”

Public Questions

Public questions concerning proposed Academy status for Parkwood School

“Linda Jones asked who at Edutrust, apart from Dame Marlene Rowbottom, had proven educational background and experience of working in schools and education. Julia Shergold, in referring to the recent league table results showing that Sheffield’s two academies had performed badly, asked how the Council could justify increasing the number of academies on educational grounds. David Fisher asked how, by going to Academy status, would this improve children’s education when, he suggested, there was no evidence to support this. He urged the Council to build on the foundation of comprehensive education and not hand over to school managers. Maxine Bowler asked, given only 15 of those people who had completed the questionnaire were in favour of the proposals and that 368 people had expressed opposition on the petition, if this demonstrated a complete disregard by the Council to the wishes of the ordinary people in Burngreave, reinforcing the view that people felt they were being disempowered and that the Council was pursuing the proposals no matter what the opposition.”

“In response, the Cabinet Member for Children’s Services (Councillor Harry Harpham) pointed out that the two Academies in Sheffield were situated in challenging areas and were not failing but factually had improved. He stated that the Council was not saying that the academy route should be pursued but had agreed for the school to take part in a debate with parents on Parkwood School and feeder schools about exploring the academy route to achieve better results. He referred to the duty of the Council to promote equality and diversity and felt it would be wrong of the Council to stop the school from having the debate. He emphasised the fact that the School Governors could stop the process at any stage. He also felt it was wrong to criticise the existing academies, as it was not fair to the children who attended them.”