St John's School

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 12 Dec 2008, 12:42

And here is an extract from the official press release of 10 December:

Go ahead for Edinburgh’s Portobello High school

A proposal to invest an estimated £41.5m in a new Portobello High School as part of the Wave 3 programme to rebuild five schools in Edinburgh is the subject of a report to be considered by the City of Edinburgh Council next week.

The full project value is estimated at between £162m and £182m, depending on the preferred option for each school. A report which went to the Council in June 2008 estimated that based on projected funds available the programme would take at least 14 years to deliver and would represent a significant challenge.

Portobello has been recommended as the first school to be rebuilt after a condition and suitability assessment gave each school a score with the intention of addressing the school in most need. The outcome of the assessment also listed the other four schools in order of priority: James Gillespie’s High School (second), Boroughmuir High School and St John's Primary School (joint third), and St Crispin's Special School (fifth).

The rebuilding of Portobello High school will now go to the budget setting process in February for approval and it is estimated that construction work would start in 2011/12 with the new school being open in 2013/14.

Councillor Marilyne MacLaren, Convener for Education, Children and Families, said: "This is great news for Portobello but this is a bitter sweet situation as the other four schools will be disappointed and worried about the future of their buildings. I am seriously concerned that the other four schools are not fit for purpose and desperately need to be replaced.

"We put the business case for each of the schools to the Scottish Government in June of this year and we have made it very clear that we need additional funding if we are to deliver all of these schools in the next five years. I will continue to work at all levels to find funding to rebuild the other four.

“The young people at each of these schools do very well despite poor buildings but I know how important it is for all young people to have the first class facilities they deserve.”

Next steps for each school

Portobello High School

A further report will go to the Education, Children and Families Committee in March to agree the size of the new school (either for 1200 or 1400 pupils).

It is recommended that the new school goes ahead on the Portobello Park site, subject to approval during the budget setting process in February.

St John's Primary School

The school community were also consulted on their preferred option (refurbishment or new build). Although responses were in favour of a refurbishment, the Children and Families Department has delayed a decision on what option should proceed when funding is available. The benefits of new build are not fully evaluated in light of the opportunities demonstrated by recently completed new buildings.

Criteria

All schools were considered using two main criteria (a) condition and (b) suitability. The assessments conformed with Government guidance on these two criteria.

Condition - surveys were carried out by property specialists employed by the council and independently validated.

Suitability - all schools carried out a self-assessment and this was then moderated by professionally qualified council staff to ensure fairness and equity across all five schools.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 12 Dec 2008, 15:21

I vivdily recall the last consultation and St John's School Board being unable to "take a position" as responses to the survey produced no clear favoured option. At least this time it was 57% for 43% against a new build so they got 25 votes for a refurb and only 20 for a new build -interestingly of that 20 -15 went for the "Alcatraz" option.

This illustrates how despicable and arrogant it was of the parent council to ask for the option to be removed. 33% of respondents favoured it.

25 to 20 is a big enough margin to determine the outcome for a school for the next 50 years isn't it? A block vote of 6 is a lot in a poll of 45 the property committee and their partners likely all voted and it could be that the result for the rest of the school was 20 to 19 FOR a new build it is simply too close to call and of questionable value. And of course the result was nobbled by David Manson's letter leading his parishioners to believie a refurb would be quick.

It is little wonder the council have postponed a decision and want to consult again in future. And they put it so diplomatically:

Wave3 Report wrote: "Officers are of the opinion that the advantages which a new build might bring are not, necessarily, completely clear to the school and a visit of staff, parents and pupils to a recently opened school such as Bonaly may help in visualising the opportunities offered by a new build."

Wonder why the proposed visit is to Bonaly Primary School and not a US penitentiary?

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 12 Dec 2008, 15:36

25 for a refurb and 20 for a new build. Do you mean only 45 responses were received? That is quite shocking.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 12 Dec 2008, 15:40

Yes 45 responses were recieived- did you edit?

As we know the St John's parents have been lacklustre but the school and its council must take a share of the blame. There was no nurture of opinion, no excitement - nada. Hopefully next time round there will be a proper consultation and a bit of a fanfare.

It seems remiss not to point out that of the 45 responses not 1 opted for a new St John's on Portobello Park.

I know that technically speaking a school on the park was not one of the options on offer but the 100% not voting for it, is one helluva powerful statistic and well worth writing to the evening News about.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 18 Dec 2008, 17:56

From today's EN:

Two axed schools set to live on as stop-gap

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 30 Dec 2008, 16:20

The Wave 3 schools debate was conducted fairly. respectfully and honorably. There was no animosity amongst the schools.

When Marilyne Maclaren delivered her summation, she focused on St Johns and how few responses there had been,, surprising for a school whose prize was a brilliant new school.

She then went onto say thet at some point in the future there would be a full consulttaion exercise.
She stated that the consutation St Johns had recently participated in had been irrevocably impaired.

I watched David "Alcatraz" Manson as he listened to MM deliver her summation. She intimated that there had been a "significant amount of misinformation bandied about" - what did she mean? She stated that the parent council had "mistakenly" been portraying the cost of a refurbishment as being much cheaper than a new school.

Basically, St John's PC got found out and the decision on a solution for the school has been postponed; until sometime in the future when the money is available. In other words the PC were stripped of any influence. this was not deemed neccessary for any of the other wave 3 schools.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 10 Feb 2009, 14:10

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/educa ... 4963250.jp

Alison Connelly is appalled that they are trying to squeeze more pupils onto the existing site. Which is exactly the way I felt about St John's Parent Council's mission to restrict the options for a new school to the very same site!!

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 10 Feb 2009, 15:14

I don't quite follow why the P1's would be going into the TU's because they're larger. That doesn't help with the fact that you need more than three classrooms to accommodate them, even with a composite. How many TU's are there?

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 10 Feb 2009, 15:17

I meant;

I don't quite follow why the P1's would be going into the TU's because they're larger. That doesn't help with the fact that you need more than two classrooms to accommodate them, even with a composite. How many TU's are there?

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 10 Feb 2009, 16:15

There are 3 TUs. If memory stands me correctly, two are used as p7 classrooms with the third, more recent one, used for group work /ICT etc.

What the max size of p1 class you could have with 2 teachers Seanie?

edit: muddled ITC/ICT

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 10 Feb 2009, 16:49

I thought the max class size was 25 regardless, so if you've got 67 entering you'll need three classes (possible one composite), although the actual classrooms could be smaller than normal since 25 pupils can be accommodated in a class about 45m2, wheras 33 pupils (the max in upper primary) should have classes about 60m2.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 10 Feb 2009, 17:00

I dont know about the newest but the others TU's were "acquired" about 16 years ago just in time for an intake of 66 P1 pupils.

Those temporary classrooms can hold classes of up to 33 pupils. Problem is that once kids leave P1 the other classrooms in the school are too small to take 33 pupils. Soupdragon may recall what happened then after P1 -did they keep the P1's in those classes?

So the school has faced an intake of almost 67 before. The extra pupil may be the straw that breaks the camels back. How does one fit a 3 class year into a 2 stream school that already has 14 classes?

I don't get the concern about the P7's "languishing" in the main building. Why should P7's be treated differently from any other year.

I seem to recall that St J's had 420 pupils at one time and 14 classes so 30 per class on average.

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 10 Feb 2009, 17:46

Porty wrote: I don't get the concern about the P7's "languishing" in the main building. Why should P7's be treated differently from any other year.

If my child was one of them I'd be concerned too. Last year, when my son was in p7 he had size 10 feet and was 5 ft 6 tall and he was by no means the only kid that size. It really does show up the shortcomings in the building provision of St John's that pupils are going to be even more cramped in the coming session. Here's hoping the new intake has parents willing to take up the cudgels on behalf of the school.

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 10 Feb 2009, 17:57

From limited knowledge, I think the max class size of 33 applies to p4 and above. There is a national agreement in place which gives 30 as a max in p1-3. Of course, this is at a time when the Scottish Government are advocating max class sizes of 18 in the early years!

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 10 Feb 2009, 20:16

P1 is supposed to be a maximum of 25 as are composites.

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 10 Feb 2009, 21:27

Thanks Seanie. Perhaps I should have said I spoke from a 'limited and out dated knowledge'?!

With both Towerbank and St John's bursting at the seams, do you think Portobello might be reborn as a fertility spa town

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 10 Feb 2009, 21:53

I suggest bromide in the water.

SoupDragon · Post by **SoupDragon** » 10 Feb 2009, 21:56

Regarding St Johns
They had a limit of 30 per class due to the size of the rooms in the main building

now as I recall some parents who really, really wanted their kids to get into the school argued the 2 rooms in the huts, where the P1s were housed, would take 33 pupils, therefore more than 30 could be taken in P1 that year. The kids remained out in the huts until the class size fell to 30
I think after that it was decided that P7s would be the classes put in the huts

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 10 Feb 2009, 22:14

There's a minimum area per pupil which from memory is either 1.7 or 1.8m2 per pupil. There might be a way to derogate from that minimum (just as you can get away with not complying with the regulations on site sizes) but I think it's generally complied with. That's why P1's might tend to be located in the smallest classrooms because there are fewer of them, but in terms of classroom organisation there's also an argument that infants probably need more space.

Older kids are (hopefully) a bit better at sitting at their tables and doing stuff from there. Little ones tend to be more on the move, sitting on the carpet, circle time etc. And schools that heve the space often try to make P1 classes a bit like nursery, with dedicated corners/areas etc. to ease transition.

But however you arrange it, if you've got 67 P1s coming in instead of 50 you'll be hard pressed to avoid creating an additional class overall. There might be a way through compositing but I can't imagine it'd be easy. So you're likely to end up losing a GP space of some kind.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 10 Feb 2009, 22:27

Take the point about foot size and height marya my lot were the same. The most relevant definition I can find for languish is" To exist or continue in miserable or disheartening conditions: languished away in prison" which reminds me of the alcatraz analogy! It seems the reduction in class sizes is causing at Johns a real problem whereas in the past they coped well, space wise with similar numbers.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 10 Feb 2009, 22:34

All of which doesn't square the actions of Alison connelly and the parent council over the last 3 years and the statement that they are appalled by the lack of space on the existing site. They can't have it both ways. As an aside if the snp ever achieve a Max of 18 per class at Johns would require 4 more classes for next years intake!

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 10 Feb 2009, 22:37

Marya wrote:With both Towerbank and St John's bursting at the seams, do you think Portobello might be reborn as a fertility spa town

I'm sure the Pope must take some credit.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 10 Feb 2009, 23:48

The Story So Far

Council - Your school is far too small and in rather poor condition. We think you need a brand new school and a bigger site. If PHS moves to Portobello Park you could expand into some of the space they vacate. Problem solved.

A St John’s Parent Council Rep - No thanks. Our school just needs to be refurbished.

Council - Sorry? Maybe you didn’t hear us properly. We are suggesting that we build a brand new school and give you a bit more space at the same time. You know - a proper playground for the kids, that sort of thing.

ASJPCR - Hmm? Sorry, did you say something? I’ve been rather distracted of late organising meetings to try to prevent PHS from being rebuilt in my backyard. Hang on a minute until I find my other hat.

Council - Look, do you want it or what? Other schools are desperate for a re-build you know.

ASJPCR - OK these are our demands. We want a refurbished school and we demand that our children are decanted, which will improve their exam results. We reserve the right to annexe the old tennis courts but not if that means it is less likely that PHS will be re-built onsite. And if you have any information about site options for the parents, just give them to me and I’ll incorporate them into this, erm fact sheet I’m working on. Here’s a refurbishment plan we made earlier.

Council - Mmm, lovely. I’ll just pop it on the back burner for a few years.

Later..

ASJPCR - Can you do something? Our school is bursting at the seams!

Council - I’m sorry, I can’t hear you. There is some noise in the background. Sounds rather like chickens coming home to roost.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 11 Feb 2009, 10:19

Good assimilation Bob, out of curiosity; how did the Parent Council report the outcome of the Wave 3 decison in December to the rest of the parent/school body. Was it in the newsletter or did they do a seperate communication? Maybe Bones or someone could tell us.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 11 Feb 2009, 16:19

According to the Evening News Feb 10th 2009

"“Alison Connelly, who is on the school's parent council, has written to education leader Marilyne MacLaren to express her concerns. "

We obvioulsy don't know what's in the letter but I imagine the recipient will be thinking something along these lines:

Dear Mrs Maclaren

I write to express St John's Parent Council concerns about a pending accommodation crisis at the school.

MM thinks "I remember you and your parent council colleague David Manson? You recently publically rubbished our offer to give St John's an additional piece of land thereby almost doubling the size of the existing site and a brand new school. If I recall correctly "It really is a poor option" - was your phrase of choice.

In December past I informed the full council that a lot of misinformation had been circulating about the options open to your school. I was referring to the misrepresentation made by the parent council to the school body at the time of the last survey and subsequently in the Evening News.

Now, you want a helping hand, as you are appalled?" Please be assured that I will do everything in my power to write to your Headteacher to ensure she manages internal school logistics the best she can.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 11 Mar 2009, 20:12

From today's EN:

Catholic schools to prioritise places for baptised children

seashell · Post by **seashell** » 13 Mar 2009, 11:08

Bob Jefferson wrote:From today's EN:

Catholic schools to prioritise places for baptised children

Sounds fair enough.

SoupDragon · Post by **SoupDragon** » 13 Mar 2009, 11:36

I'm sure it's been the case for a while.
When Clangers 3 and 4 were enrolled we had to prove our residence in the catchment area and write stating we agrred with the moral ethos of the school ( or words to that effect ).
We also had to provide birth certificates for proof of age, coincidently baptisms are often recorded on the back of birth certificates

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 13 Mar 2009, 11:51

It has always been the case that children who have been baptised get priority when placement requests outstrip the number of places available. There is nothing new in the article.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 13 Mar 2009, 11:52

So how easy or difficult is it to obtain a baptism of convenience? After all, most couples get married in church without believing in God. How many counselling sessions would you need to attend? How often do you need to attend mass? Is a register kept? Could you say you attend and get away with it or do you run the risk of being informed upon?

What if you have one child already at St John's but aren't Catholic and you have a second child who is ready to start school? If your points don't stack up, how do you cope with two young children enrolled in different primary schools?

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 13 Mar 2009, 12:05

It isn't easy to get a 'baptism of convenience', just as it isn't that easy to have a R.C. church wedding without attendance at mass and a course of marriage preparation. And that's in addition to at least one person being able to provide certificates of baptism, confirmation etc from his/her parish priest.

Placing a child in a school outwith your catchment area will always hold risks in placing a sibling there also. There is a clear set of guidelines that come into play and children with siblings at a school also get priority, but there is a pecking order. RC schools are no exception to this.

I know of one RC family who had a child in St John's and another at a different primary, because they lived outside the catchment area and priority went first to catchment area pupils. You don't just wave a baptism certificate and get free admittance.

If you are attacking the existence of RC schools, Bob, then that is a completely different argument.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 13 Mar 2009, 12:17

I was thinking more of a scenario where a non-Catholic, or perhaps non-practising Catholic, living in the catchment area had a child already enrolled and might now find difficulty getting their second child in.

I imagine the degree of difficulty in getting your child baptised must depend on the line taken by individual priests but, as you know, parents will do just about anything to get their kids into their school of choice.

Marya wrote:If you are attacking the existence of RC schools, Bob, then that is a completely different argument.

It is and I'm not on this occasion.

seashell · Post by **seashell** » 13 Mar 2009, 12:35

Bob Jefferson wrote:I was thinking more of a scenario where a non-Catholic, or perhaps non-practising Catholic, living in the catchment area had a child already enrolled and might now find difficulty getting their second child in.

I imagine the degree of difficulty in getting your child baptised must depend on the line taken by individual priests but, as you know, parents will do just about anything to get their kids into their school of choice.

In the scenario you put forward - the parents really should ask why they are sending child 1 to a Catholic school if they are not raising their children as Catholic.
And if parents will do just about anything - then regular attendance at Mass as a family shouldn't be too big a deal. And if it is - then they shouldn't be sending their children to a Catholic school!

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 13 Mar 2009, 12:41

Bob Jefferson wrote:I was thinking more of a scenario where a non-Catholic, or perhaps non-practising Catholic, living in the catchment area had a child already enrolled and might now find difficulty getting their second child in.

Yes, I accept there could well be families running between two schools, but out of the 17 pupils, who can't be accommodated, I wonder how many already have siblings at St John's? Fortunately, going between, say, Duddingston and St John's wouldn't be that difficult (I've seen parents with kids at St John's and another at nursery in Duddingston Primary), though it is by no means an ideal situation.

I imagine the degree of difficulty in getting your child baptised must depend on the line taken by individual priests but, as you know, parents will do just about anything to get their kids into their school of choice.

Have you ever met a priest Bob?:lol: Seriously, of course, there are kids who are baptised and then turn out to be infrequent attendees at church. It does , however, raise another issue, which is why are denominational schools so popular with non-Catholic families?

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 13 Mar 2009, 12:42

It is a Catholic school and I think that to give priority to baptised children seems very fair.

One of the things that has always amazed me is why parents are so obsessed with what primary school their kids go to when they live in this area. The choices are essentially, Parsons Green, Royal High, Duddingston, St Johns and Towerbank. All of them good schools, all of them with good kids and although at times one may be a bit better on some issues than the others, over the course of the 7 years it all seems to balance itself out.

Chill and send them to catchment Man.....