Ofsted inspectors: "Highcrest Academy requires improvement"

Bucks Free Press: Ofsted inspectors: "Highcrest Academy requires improvement" Ofsted inspectors: "Highcrest Academy requires improvement"

OFSTED has ruled the Highcrest Academy “requires improvement”.

But Highcrest – which was ranked “outstanding” in its final inspection as a secondary school in 2010 before it converted to an academy last year – believes the judgement is “unfair”.

Inspectors ruled the proportion of Highcrest pupils obtaining five A* to C grades including English and maths has “not improved rapidly enough” and was below the national average.

They also raised concerns about the performance of the Sixth Form - stating Highcrest needed to improve its retention rates, quality of provision and students’ outcomes by making sure the courses on offer fully meet students’ needs and that teaching is consistently good.

Inspectors said governors are committed and have effective committee systems in place but ‘do not have a clear enough view of the school’s performance which limits their ability ask challenging questions’.

The report does however praise the overall quality of teaching and the behaviour and attitude of the academy’s children.

Ofsted also praised the progress made by students in English, science and maths subjects, as well as the development of disabled pupils and children who use English as an additional language.

The government brought in the new “requires improvement” rating to replace “satisfactory” in a bid to improve standards in schools.

In a letter sent home to parents last week, Chris Turner, Chairman of Governors at Highcrest, said: “There were many encouraging conclusions in the report.

“However, the governors take issue with the main judgement which said the overall effectiveness of the academy ‘requires improvement’.”

He said, under the new rules, inspectors were unable to take into account the “dramatic improvement” of Highcrest over the last decade or the demographic and area it serves in a selective county.

Highcrest was being judged against national standards based on comprehensive schools – yet more than 40 percent of Bucks children attend a grammar school instead of a comprehensive school, he said.

Mr Turner added: “The rating of “requires improvement” for [the] Achievement of Pupils [category] has the knock-on effect of limiting the overall grade and the grade for Leadership and Management which we believe is an unfair reflection of the work of our students, staff and the governing body...

“We do not believe Highcrest has declined in the last three years. In fact, there is strong evidence to the contrary. Make no mistake; this is an academy in very good shape.”

Failing Hatters Lane Upper School was closed by Ofsted in 2001 before it was relaunched as Highcrest Community School under the Labour government’s Fresh Start scheme in 2001.

It received an “outstanding” rating by inspectors in 2010 before it converted into an academy last year.

Highcrest introduced a controversial new admissions test in September 2012, which principal Shena Moynihan said could pose a “real challenge” to the county’s 11+ system.

Lakshan Wanigasooriya, a Labour spokesman in Totteridge, called the academy’s first Ofsted report “disappointing”.

The full Ofsted report can be found by clicking here.

Comments (69)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

4:36pm Mon 16 Dec 13

Marlow Mum says...

Excellent. More madness from Ofsted. Just one thing though: What are they going to do when they've demoralised all the local secondary schools (both pupils and teachers alike). Close them all down? We all know of other schools in the local area struggling to recruit; this incessant sniping from Ofsted can only make that situation worse.
The 11+ - like it or loathe it - exists in Bucks and our schools cannot and should not be compared to schools in other counties.
Excellent. More madness from Ofsted. Just one thing though: What are they going to do when they've demoralised all the local secondary schools (both pupils and teachers alike). Close them all down? We all know of other schools in the local area struggling to recruit; this incessant sniping from Ofsted can only make that situation worse. The 11+ - like it or loathe it - exists in Bucks and our schools cannot and should not be compared to schools in other counties. Marlow Mum

4:37pm Mon 16 Dec 13

Bartholomew HuckleBerry says...

The reasons behind this is the arrogance of the head-teacher and the idiots responsible for human resources and their selection of candidates for the available jobs and posts.
The reasons behind this is the arrogance of the head-teacher and the idiots responsible for human resources and their selection of candidates for the available jobs and posts. Bartholomew HuckleBerry

4:57pm Mon 16 Dec 13

Marmite XO says...

As long as the Grammar Schools are doing well, what is the problem? By the time the failures go to schools like Highcrest, they are already lost causes. As long as they get enough support to steer them away from a life of crime, the school has done its job.
As long as the Grammar Schools are doing well, what is the problem? By the time the failures go to schools like Highcrest, they are already lost causes. As long as they get enough support to steer them away from a life of crime, the school has done its job. Marmite XO

5:08pm Mon 16 Dec 13

Drummer-12 says...

They kicked out a lot of sixth formers recently as they knew they were failing! Backfired on them.
They kicked out a lot of sixth formers recently as they knew they were failing! Backfired on them. Drummer-12

6:01pm Mon 16 Dec 13

Dickitdo says...

Highcrest ! now CrestFallen !!.
Highcrest ! now CrestFallen !!. Dickitdo

6:43pm Mon 16 Dec 13

Wycombe-buddy says...

Its funny they have been advertising the school using the "rated outstanding by ofsted" every open day, every newspaper article , every event they always mentioned their outstanding.. even on their website.. they have now removed the ofsted reports section on their website haha
Its funny they have been advertising the school using the "rated outstanding by ofsted" every open day, every newspaper article , every event they always mentioned their outstanding.. even on their website.. they have now removed the ofsted reports section on their website haha Wycombe-buddy

8:22pm Mon 16 Dec 13

itstheprincipal says...

This indeed is a case of the chickens coming home to roost! For Mr. Turner, Chair of Governors to state “We do not believe Highcrest has declined in the last three years....” then you realise just how much of a problem Highcrest has. The words “ostrich” “head” & “sand” spring to mind!
“Inspectors said governors....... ‘do not have a clear enough view of the school’s performance which limits their ability to ask challenging questions”. Or in other words, the Governors have no idea what is going on at the school!
Since becoming an academy Highcrest has been slammed into reverse, the exam results both in GCSE & A levels were some of the worst ever, in fact the results have gone backwards by 7 years, but that’s OK because Mr. Turner “does not believe Highcrest has declined...”!!!
Sixth Form is an embarrassment at Highcrest, visit all the other schools Sixth Forms then visit Highcrest & you will see that it is none existent. It has NO facilities, has very few options to choose from, & has absolutely awful results, but that’s OK because Mr. Turner “does not believe Highcrest has declined...”!!!
Official results will be released by the Government later this month showing ‘actual’ results of GCSEs 2013 (not just the ones Highcrest like you to see), this will show that Highcrest is now not only the lowest achieving school in Wycombe, but also in Bucks.
Wycombe-buddy states “every event they always mentioned their outstanding.. even on their website.. they have now removed the ofsted reports section on their website haha...” Quite ironic isn’t it, Miss Moynihan doesn’t seem to want anyone to see it...I wonder why?
Moynihan needs to stop blaming everyone else, “it’s not the right area, it’s too close to the grammar school, everyone’s against us” all spoken in a whiny voice!! She needs to get on with the job WE pay her to do, & that is teach (Oh! hold on a minute she doesn’t actually teach any classes does she!), just get on with getting the very best out of the students you have rather than giving up on them in favour of students from literally miles away.
If you really want an insight into Highcrests ethos go to their website & search “self evaluation executive summary” where basically the management rate themselves....& lo & behold they rate the school ‘outstanding’ in EVERYTHING!!!
Miss Moynihan YOU’VE BEEN CAUGHT OUT!!! You're not outstanding & I'm not sure you ever were, welcome to the real world
This indeed is a case of the chickens coming home to roost! For Mr. Turner, Chair of Governors to state “We do not believe Highcrest has declined in the last three years....” then you realise just how much of a problem Highcrest has. The words “ostrich” “head” & “sand” spring to mind! “Inspectors said governors....... ‘do not have a clear enough view of the school’s performance which limits their ability to ask challenging questions”. Or in other words, the Governors have no idea what is going on at the school! Since becoming an academy Highcrest has been slammed into reverse, the exam results both in GCSE & A levels were some of the worst ever, in fact the results have gone backwards by 7 years, but that’s OK because Mr. Turner “does not believe Highcrest has declined...”!!! Sixth Form is an embarrassment at Highcrest, visit all the other schools Sixth Forms then visit Highcrest & you will see that it is none existent. It has NO facilities, has very few options to choose from, & has absolutely awful results, but that’s OK because Mr. Turner “does not believe Highcrest has declined...”!!! Official results will be released by the Government later this month showing ‘actual’ results of GCSEs 2013 (not just the ones Highcrest like you to see), this will show that Highcrest is now not only the lowest achieving school in Wycombe, but also in Bucks. Wycombe-buddy states “every event they always mentioned their outstanding.. even on their website.. they have now removed the ofsted reports section on their website haha...” Quite ironic isn’t it, Miss Moynihan doesn’t seem to want anyone to see it...I wonder why? Moynihan needs to stop blaming everyone else, “it’s not the right area, it’s too close to the grammar school, everyone’s against us” all spoken in a whiny voice!! She needs to get on with the job WE pay her to do, & that is teach (Oh! hold on a minute she doesn’t actually teach any classes does she!), just get on with getting the very best out of the students you have rather than giving up on them in favour of students from literally miles away. If you really want an insight into Highcrests ethos go to their website & search “self evaluation executive summary” where basically the management rate themselves....& lo & behold they rate the school ‘outstanding’ in EVERYTHING!!! Miss Moynihan YOU’VE BEEN CAUGHT OUT!!! You're not outstanding & I'm not sure you ever were, welcome to the real world itstheprincipal

10:43pm Mon 16 Dec 13

Littleskyfall says...

When Highcrest were under Bucks County Council and had to adhere to their regulations it did relatively well, since becoming an Academy it has gone downhill fast. To answer only to themselves just shows the Head and the Governors are not up to the job, and unfortunately the kids are suffering. I think the Local Authority should now take control and it should go back to a Community School and take away the banding test. At least then the 37 local kids who failed to get a place will then get in to their local school as they should. New Governors should be appointed by the local authority, not chosen by the Head, in fact I think she should resign and let someone else new come in to sort this out.
When Highcrest were under Bucks County Council and had to adhere to their regulations it did relatively well, since becoming an Academy it has gone downhill fast. To answer only to themselves just shows the Head and the Governors are not up to the job, and unfortunately the kids are suffering. I think the Local Authority should now take control and it should go back to a Community School and take away the banding test. At least then the 37 local kids who failed to get a place will then get in to their local school as they should. New Governors should be appointed by the local authority, not chosen by the Head, in fact I think she should resign and let someone else new come in to sort this out. Littleskyfall

11:27pm Mon 16 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

Marlow Mum wrote:
Excellent. More madness from Ofsted. Just one thing though: What are they going to do when they've demoralised all the local secondary schools (both pupils and teachers alike). Close them all down? We all know of other schools in the local area struggling to recruit; this incessant sniping from Ofsted can only make that situation worse.
The 11+ - like it or loathe it - exists in Bucks and our schools cannot and should not be compared to schools in other counties.
‘The 11+ - like it or loathe it - exists in Bucks and our schools cannot and should not be compared to schools in other counties.’

That is a silly comment - name the problem - say it ‘exists’ as if were an inevitable natural phenomenon and nothing could be done about it and then we can carry on working round the problem without these infuriating comparisons with other areas where they got rid of the problem years ago.

In another way this is a good comment though - which echoes one by Reg Rundle some years ago, when the BFP published Department of Education exam performance tables (as part of its cheerleading policy for the 11+ using the ludicrous and now largely unheard ‘freedom of choice’ mantra).
After reading the results, Mr Rundle, one of the governors at Cressex School, posted here and said

’ I concluded that the results for Buckinghamshire are not in line with the vast number of areas where selection is not in place and that Mr Gove’s drive to get improvement in other parts of the country have the effect of comparing schools in Buckinghamshire with other schools where the pupil mix is not reduced by the extraction of about 40% of those children who have been selected.’
(For the full story see:
http://www.bucksfree
press.co.uk/yoursay/
opinion/yourletters/
8963580.I_d_give_Buc
ks_Free_Press_low_ma
rks_for_school_repor
t/ )

The 11+ is the source of the endless musical chairs saga of failing local secondary modern schools. By taking out a large part of the most talented amongst our children it ensures that our failing secondary modern schools are on an endless switchback of failure and temporary partial recovery.

In a little while the BFP will be able to go to stage 2 of this cyclical process and ‘congratulate’ Highcrest (for the second time in a few years) on its heart-warming achievement in ‘courageously recovering’ from fgailure.

(It reached this stage some months ago with Wye Valley School which went into ‘special measures’ after an Ofsted report at a time when the BCC ‘Cabinet Member for Education’ was chairman of the governors - see: http://www.bucksfree
press.co.uk/news/105
27549.School_celebra
tes_achievements_on_
road_to_recovery/ )

If you support the 11+ you support second-rate education for all who fail it.
[quote][p][bold]Marlow Mum[/bold] wrote: Excellent. More madness from Ofsted. Just one thing though: What are they going to do when they've demoralised all the local secondary schools (both pupils and teachers alike). Close them all down? We all know of other schools in the local area struggling to recruit; this incessant sniping from Ofsted can only make that situation worse. The 11+ - like it or loathe it - exists in Bucks and our schools cannot and should not be compared to schools in other counties.[/p][/quote][italic] ‘The 11+ - like it or loathe it - exists in Bucks and our schools cannot and should not be compared to schools in other counties.’ [/italic] That is a silly comment - name the problem - say it ‘exists’ as if were an inevitable natural phenomenon and nothing could be done about it and then we can carry on working round the problem without these infuriating comparisons with other areas where they got rid of the problem years ago. In another way this is a good comment though - which echoes one by Reg Rundle some years ago, when the BFP published Department of Education exam performance tables (as part of its cheerleading policy for the 11+ using the ludicrous and now largely unheard ‘freedom of choice’ mantra). After reading the results, Mr Rundle, one of the governors at Cressex School, posted here and said [italic]’ I concluded that the results for Buckinghamshire are not in line with the vast number of areas where selection is not in place and that Mr Gove’s drive to get improvement in other parts of the country have the effect of comparing schools in Buckinghamshire with other schools where the pupil mix is not reduced by the extraction of about 40% of those children who have been selected.’ [/italic] (For the full story see: http://www.bucksfree press.co.uk/yoursay/ opinion/yourletters/ 8963580.I_d_give_Buc ks_Free_Press_low_ma rks_for_school_repor t/ ) The 11+ is the source of the endless musical chairs saga of failing local secondary modern schools. By taking out a large part of the most talented amongst our children it ensures that our failing secondary modern schools are on an endless switchback of failure and temporary partial recovery. In a little while the BFP will be able to go to stage 2 of this cyclical process and ‘congratulate’ Highcrest (for the second time in a few years) on its heart-warming achievement in ‘courageously recovering’ from fgailure. (It reached this stage some months ago with Wye Valley School which went into ‘special measures’ after an Ofsted report at a time when the BCC ‘Cabinet Member for Education’ was chairman of the governors - see: http://www.bucksfree press.co.uk/news/105 27549.School_celebra tes_achievements_on_ road_to_recovery/ ) If you support the 11+ you support second-rate education for all who fail it. Undercover Euro Yob

11:29pm Mon 16 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

(And that is not the same as ensuring excellence for those who are already gifted by nature.)
(And that is not the same as ensuring excellence for those who are already gifted by nature.) Undercover Euro Yob

12:33am Tue 17 Dec 13

itstheprincipal says...

Miss Moynihan stated last year that Highcrest was now the No.1 choice for parents in High Wycombe & that pupils were choosing Highcrest instead of the RGS. If that were at all true, which I severely doubt, it most certainly will not be now.
As a community school it worked well, as an academy it has, I’m sad to say, become a bit of a laughing stock. It has lost all common ground with pupils, parents, staff & even the community itself. The banding tests & all ability nonsense makes things worse.
Chair of Governors stated “Highcrest – which was ranked “outstanding” in its final inspection as a secondary school in 2010 before it converted to an academy last year – believes the judgement is “unfair”. I think that quantifies what I was saying, as a community school ‘outstanding’, as an academy ‘satisfactory’. But let’s not worry too much, as Mr. Turner says “this judgement is unfair” & he is obviously a qualified Ofsted inspector & knows exactly what is going on at the school, Oh! No wait a minute Ofsted caught the Governors out when they realised that for themselves, that the Governors don’t know what is going on!!!
“The Ofsted Outstanding badge is only given to schools which achieve the Oustanding status and can only be used by these schools.” Presumably Highcrest will now be taking down all signage, removing all forms & headed paper with this logo on tout suite. They could always replace them with signs saying ‘satisfactory’, or would that explode the myth?
Miss Moynihan stated last year that Highcrest was now the No.1 choice for parents in High Wycombe & that pupils were choosing Highcrest instead of the RGS. If that were at all true, which I severely doubt, it most certainly will not be now. As a community school it worked well, as an academy it has, I’m sad to say, become a bit of a laughing stock. It has lost all common ground with pupils, parents, staff & even the community itself. The banding tests & all ability nonsense makes things worse. Chair of Governors stated “Highcrest – which was ranked “outstanding” in its final inspection as a secondary school in 2010 before it converted to an academy last year – believes the judgement is “unfair”. I think that quantifies what I was saying, as a community school ‘outstanding’, as an academy ‘satisfactory’. But let’s not worry too much, as Mr. Turner says “this judgement is unfair” & he is obviously a qualified Ofsted inspector & knows exactly what is going on at the school, Oh! No wait a minute Ofsted caught the Governors out when they realised that for themselves, that the Governors don’t know what is going on!!! “The Ofsted Outstanding badge is only given to schools which achieve the Oustanding status and can only be used by these schools.” Presumably Highcrest will now be taking down all signage, removing all forms & headed paper with this logo on tout suite. They could always replace them with signs saying ‘satisfactory’, or would that explode the myth? itstheprincipal

1:14am Tue 17 Dec 13

Dickitdo says...

Me thinks some devious person has crept into a certain I .T Suite and has been messing with the voting results on this particular article , I wonder who would do that .?.
Me thinks some devious person has crept into a certain I .T Suite and has been messing with the voting results on this particular article , I wonder who would do that .?. Dickitdo

3:21am Tue 17 Dec 13

Dickitdo says...

Would anyone agree with me that IVOR must be an OFSTED INSPECTOR that would be a good reason for the schools disappointing results.
Would anyone agree with me that IVOR must be an OFSTED INSPECTOR that would be a good reason for the schools disappointing results. Dickitdo

7:51am Tue 17 Dec 13

snowbaby says...

For many years Highcrest has had an excellent publicity machine. They hide overall poor results in headline good results and most people do not look beyound that. Many of those who know the school, have been aware of serious shortcomings for some time. It is good to know that this has finally become more public and perhaps this school will cease to be allowed to trade on its own publicity.
Their type of overly complicated admissions process has recently been criticised (http://www.bbc.co.u
k/news/education-251
53419) as well. This does not benefit local children and has simply been an attempt to brand themselves (laughably) as the No 1 choice for parents.
This school has broken rules and abused data for years. I hope that parents and the community will now stop being fooled by spin!
For many years Highcrest has had an excellent publicity machine. They hide overall poor results in headline good results and most people do not look beyound that. Many of those who know the school, have been aware of serious shortcomings for some time. It is good to know that this has finally become more public and perhaps this school will cease to be allowed to trade on its own publicity. Their type of overly complicated admissions process has recently been criticised (http://www.bbc.co.u k/news/education-251 53419) as well. This does not benefit local children and has simply been an attempt to brand themselves (laughably) as the No 1 choice for parents. This school has broken rules and abused data for years. I hope that parents and the community will now stop being fooled by spin! snowbaby

8:55am Tue 17 Dec 13

slickchick says...

One of the problems is that the school introduced a banding system in the hope that they could reduce the number of local children attending and gain some brighter children from outlying areas. The schools publicity stated that the test was an alternative to the 11+ and children who qualified for grammar schools would choose Highcrest. Privately however, the senior staff anticipated that all the A &B band children who passed the 11+ would not come to Highcrest. In private conversations with the then governors, it was clear that the governors had no idea of how the banding tests would work in practice and they had not challenged the school principle and management to justify the proposed admission arrangements.. The school still puts out misleading information on it web site by stating that the tests did not disadvantage local children. Well 37 children who lived within a mile of the school were denied admission while other "preferred" children who lived at greater distances from the school were admitted. The school is now in serious danger of losing the support of the local community which will only make the situation worse.
One of the problems is that the school introduced a banding system in the hope that they could reduce the number of local children attending and gain some brighter children from outlying areas. The schools publicity stated that the test was an alternative to the 11+ and children who qualified for grammar schools would choose Highcrest. Privately however, the senior staff anticipated that all the A &B band children who passed the 11+ would not come to Highcrest. In private conversations with the then governors, it was clear that the governors had no idea of how the banding tests would work in practice and they had not challenged the school principle and management to justify the proposed admission arrangements.. The school still puts out misleading information on it web site by stating that the tests did not disadvantage local children. Well 37 children who lived within a mile of the school were denied admission while other "preferred" children who lived at greater distances from the school were admitted. The school is now in serious danger of losing the support of the local community which will only make the situation worse. slickchick

8:56am Tue 17 Dec 13

listerps2 says...

Why hasn't the Bucks Free Press reported on all the other Ofsted Inspections that have happened lately - St Michael's had theirs before half term and received "Good" for everything.
Why hasn't the Bucks Free Press reported on all the other Ofsted Inspections that have happened lately - St Michael's had theirs before half term and received "Good" for everything. listerps2

10:05am Tue 17 Dec 13

Wycombe-buddy says...

itstheprincipal wrote:
This indeed is a case of the chickens coming home to roost! For Mr. Turner, Chair of Governors to state “We do not believe Highcrest has declined in the last three years....” then you realise just how much of a problem Highcrest has. The words “ostrich” “head” & “sand” spring to mind!
“Inspectors said governors....... ‘do not have a clear enough view of the school’s performance which limits their ability to ask challenging questions”. Or in other words, the Governors have no idea what is going on at the school!
Since becoming an academy Highcrest has been slammed into reverse, the exam results both in GCSE & A levels were some of the worst ever, in fact the results have gone backwards by 7 years, but that’s OK because Mr. Turner “does not believe Highcrest has declined...”!!!
Sixth Form is an embarrassment at Highcrest, visit all the other schools Sixth Forms then visit Highcrest & you will see that it is none existent. It has NO facilities, has very few options to choose from, & has absolutely awful results, but that’s OK because Mr. Turner “does not believe Highcrest has declined...”!!!
Official results will be released by the Government later this month showing ‘actual’ results of GCSEs 2013 (not just the ones Highcrest like you to see), this will show that Highcrest is now not only the lowest achieving school in Wycombe, but also in Bucks.
Wycombe-buddy states “every event they always mentioned their outstanding.. even on their website.. they have now removed the ofsted reports section on their website haha...” Quite ironic isn’t it, Miss Moynihan doesn’t seem to want anyone to see it...I wonder why?
Moynihan needs to stop blaming everyone else, “it’s not the right area, it’s too close to the grammar school, everyone’s against us” all spoken in a whiny voice!! She needs to get on with the job WE pay her to do, & that is teach (Oh! hold on a minute she doesn’t actually teach any classes does she!), just get on with getting the very best out of the students you have rather than giving up on them in favour of students from literally miles away.
If you really want an insight into Highcrests ethos go to their website & search “self evaluation executive summary” where basically the management rate themselves....& lo & behold they rate the school ‘outstanding’ in EVERYTHING!!!
Miss Moynihan YOU’VE BEEN CAUGHT OUT!!! You're not outstanding & I'm not sure you ever were, welcome to the real world
Haha guess what they have also removed the "self evaluation executive summary" section today!
[quote][p][bold]itstheprincipal[/bold] wrote: This indeed is a case of the chickens coming home to roost! For Mr. Turner, Chair of Governors to state “We do not believe Highcrest has declined in the last three years....” then you realise just how much of a problem Highcrest has. The words “ostrich” “head” & “sand” spring to mind! “Inspectors said governors....... ‘do not have a clear enough view of the school’s performance which limits their ability to ask challenging questions”. Or in other words, the Governors have no idea what is going on at the school! Since becoming an academy Highcrest has been slammed into reverse, the exam results both in GCSE & A levels were some of the worst ever, in fact the results have gone backwards by 7 years, but that’s OK because Mr. Turner “does not believe Highcrest has declined...”!!! Sixth Form is an embarrassment at Highcrest, visit all the other schools Sixth Forms then visit Highcrest & you will see that it is none existent. It has NO facilities, has very few options to choose from, & has absolutely awful results, but that’s OK because Mr. Turner “does not believe Highcrest has declined...”!!! Official results will be released by the Government later this month showing ‘actual’ results of GCSEs 2013 (not just the ones Highcrest like you to see), this will show that Highcrest is now not only the lowest achieving school in Wycombe, but also in Bucks. Wycombe-buddy states “every event they always mentioned their outstanding.. even on their website.. they have now removed the ofsted reports section on their website haha...” Quite ironic isn’t it, Miss Moynihan doesn’t seem to want anyone to see it...I wonder why? Moynihan needs to stop blaming everyone else, “it’s not the right area, it’s too close to the grammar school, everyone’s against us” all spoken in a whiny voice!! She needs to get on with the job WE pay her to do, & that is teach (Oh! hold on a minute she doesn’t actually teach any classes does she!), just get on with getting the very best out of the students you have rather than giving up on them in favour of students from literally miles away. If you really want an insight into Highcrests ethos go to their website & search “self evaluation executive summary” where basically the management rate themselves....& lo & behold they rate the school ‘outstanding’ in EVERYTHING!!! Miss Moynihan YOU’VE BEEN CAUGHT OUT!!! You're not outstanding & I'm not sure you ever were, welcome to the real world[/p][/quote]Haha guess what they have also removed the "self evaluation executive summary" section today! Wycombe-buddy

10:42am Tue 17 Dec 13

BecksH says...

A slightly different take on this... You'll know from my previous posts that I have been and remain strongly opposed to Highcrest's new admissions policy and the way in which it is disadvantaging local children.

However, I see the school's recent Ofsted report far more as a reflection of the absurdity of the Ofsted process than of Highcrest.

The report outlines many areas of Highcrest's progress and achievements - in teaching, in ethos and in behaviour, amongst others. To my mind, it just makes no sense to say that a school has 'good' teaching, behaviour management, etc. and then to say that attainment 'requires improvement'. This seems to be because while the report notes Highcrest's below average intake, it does not permit this as crucial context for some of the below average exam results. And the overall incoherence is made worse when elsewhere the report talks about the good progress being made by students in key areas, including English, maths and science, and from particular backgrounds.

There is a wealth of research around how very hard it is for secondary schools to make up for learning deficits from a child's first 11 years, however outstanding the teaching. It seems to me that this understanding needs to be held in balance with keeping expectations high, and Ofsted do not get this right.

Sadly the inspection process seems to be increasingly politicised and random. And it is hard-working teachers and children who are undermined and demoralised in the process. I'm sure Highcrest can and will take lessons from the report, but the fact is they have made huge progress over recent years and will always face steep challenges while they operate in a wholly selective system.
A slightly different take on this... You'll know from my previous posts that I have been and remain strongly opposed to Highcrest's new admissions policy and the way in which it is disadvantaging local children. However, I see the school's recent Ofsted report far more as a reflection of the absurdity of the Ofsted process than of Highcrest. The report outlines many areas of Highcrest's progress and achievements - in teaching, in ethos and in behaviour, amongst others. To my mind, it just makes no sense to say that a school has 'good' teaching, behaviour management, etc. and then to say that attainment 'requires improvement'. This seems to be because while the report notes Highcrest's below average intake, it does not permit this as crucial context for some of the below average exam results. And the overall incoherence is made worse when elsewhere the report talks about the good progress being made by students in key areas, including English, maths and science, and from particular backgrounds. There is a wealth of research around how very hard it is for secondary schools to make up for learning deficits from a child's first 11 years, however outstanding the teaching. It seems to me that this understanding needs to be held in balance with keeping expectations high, and Ofsted do not get this right. Sadly the inspection process seems to be increasingly politicised and random. And it is hard-working teachers and children who are undermined and demoralised in the process. I'm sure Highcrest can and will take lessons from the report, but the fact is they have made huge progress over recent years and will always face steep challenges while they operate in a wholly selective system. BecksH

12:08pm Tue 17 Dec 13

Bajina says...

listerps2 wrote:
Why hasn't the Bucks Free Press reported on all the other Ofsted Inspections that have happened lately - St Michael's had theirs before half term and received "Good" for everything.
Well done, St Michael's School.
[quote][p][bold]listerps2[/bold] wrote: Why hasn't the Bucks Free Press reported on all the other Ofsted Inspections that have happened lately - St Michael's had theirs before half term and received "Good" for everything.[/p][/quote]Well done, St Michael's School. Bajina

4:22pm Tue 17 Dec 13

BucksResident says...

slickchick wrote:
One of the problems is that the school introduced a banding system in the hope that they could reduce the number of local children attending and gain some brighter children from outlying areas. The schools publicity stated that the test was an alternative to the 11+ and children who qualified for grammar schools would choose Highcrest. Privately however, the senior staff anticipated that all the A &B band children who passed the 11+ would not come to Highcrest. In private conversations with the then governors, it was clear that the governors had no idea of how the banding tests would work in practice and they had not challenged the school principle and management to justify the proposed admission arrangements.. The school still puts out misleading information on it web site by stating that the tests did not disadvantage local children. Well 37 children who lived within a mile of the school were denied admission while other "preferred" children who lived at greater distances from the school were admitted. The school is now in serious danger of losing the support of the local community which will only make the situation worse.
May I just ask how you know what the senior staff thought/anticipated privately? And what was discussed in private conversations with the governors? Were you participating in these disucssions/conversa
tions?
[quote][p][bold]slickchick[/bold] wrote: One of the problems is that the school introduced a banding system in the hope that they could reduce the number of local children attending and gain some brighter children from outlying areas. The schools publicity stated that the test was an alternative to the 11+ and children who qualified for grammar schools would choose Highcrest. Privately however, the senior staff anticipated that all the A &B band children who passed the 11+ would not come to Highcrest. In private conversations with the then governors, it was clear that the governors had no idea of how the banding tests would work in practice and they had not challenged the school principle and management to justify the proposed admission arrangements.. The school still puts out misleading information on it web site by stating that the tests did not disadvantage local children. Well 37 children who lived within a mile of the school were denied admission while other "preferred" children who lived at greater distances from the school were admitted. The school is now in serious danger of losing the support of the local community which will only make the situation worse.[/p][/quote]May I just ask how you know what the senior staff thought/anticipated privately? And what was discussed in private conversations with the governors? Were you participating in these disucssions/conversa tions? BucksResident

5:13pm Tue 17 Dec 13

Rowratty says...

BucksResident wrote:
slickchick wrote:
One of the problems is that the school introduced a banding system in the hope that they could reduce the number of local children attending and gain some brighter children from outlying areas. The schools publicity stated that the test was an alternative to the 11+ and children who qualified for grammar schools would choose Highcrest. Privately however, the senior staff anticipated that all the A &B band children who passed the 11+ would not come to Highcrest. In private conversations with the then governors, it was clear that the governors had no idea of how the banding tests would work in practice and they had not challenged the school principle and management to justify the proposed admission arrangements.. The school still puts out misleading information on it web site by stating that the tests did not disadvantage local children. Well 37 children who lived within a mile of the school were denied admission while other "preferred" children who lived at greater distances from the school were admitted. The school is now in serious danger of losing the support of the local community which will only make the situation worse.
May I just ask how you know what the senior staff thought/anticipated privately? And what was discussed in private conversations with the governors? Were you participating in these disucssions/conversa

tions?
Perhaps slickchick is an Ex-Governor or an Ex-Staff member with access to 'insider' information and documented evidence regarding the SLT and their activities?
[quote][p][bold]BucksResident[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]slickchick[/bold] wrote: One of the problems is that the school introduced a banding system in the hope that they could reduce the number of local children attending and gain some brighter children from outlying areas. The schools publicity stated that the test was an alternative to the 11+ and children who qualified for grammar schools would choose Highcrest. Privately however, the senior staff anticipated that all the A &B band children who passed the 11+ would not come to Highcrest. In private conversations with the then governors, it was clear that the governors had no idea of how the banding tests would work in practice and they had not challenged the school principle and management to justify the proposed admission arrangements.. The school still puts out misleading information on it web site by stating that the tests did not disadvantage local children. Well 37 children who lived within a mile of the school were denied admission while other "preferred" children who lived at greater distances from the school were admitted. The school is now in serious danger of losing the support of the local community which will only make the situation worse.[/p][/quote]May I just ask how you know what the senior staff thought/anticipated privately? And what was discussed in private conversations with the governors? Were you participating in these disucssions/conversa tions?[/p][/quote]Perhaps slickchick is an Ex-Governor or an Ex-Staff member with access to 'insider' information and documented evidence regarding the SLT and their activities? Rowratty

5:37pm Tue 17 Dec 13

BucksResident says...

I should imagine that the best person to comment on my query would be slick chick themselves. Any other comments are therefore purely speculative and unwarranted.
I should imagine that the best person to comment on my query would be slick chick themselves. Any other comments are therefore purely speculative and unwarranted. BucksResident

5:51pm Tue 17 Dec 13

Rowratty says...

BucksResident wrote:
I should imagine that the best person to comment on my query would be slick chick themselves. Any other comments are therefore purely speculative and unwarranted.
My apologies, I was under the mistaken impression that anyone was allowed to make a comment or voice an opinion.

I Agree with your "purely speculative" hence my use of the word "perhaps".
However, I would disagree with your use of "unwarranted". I offered a plausible and logical explanation to your enquiry.
[quote][p][bold]BucksResident[/bold] wrote: I should imagine that the best person to comment on my query would be slick chick themselves. Any other comments are therefore purely speculative and unwarranted.[/p][/quote]My apologies, I was under the mistaken impression that anyone was allowed to make a comment or voice an opinion. I Agree with your "purely speculative" hence my use of the word "perhaps". However, I would disagree with your use of "unwarranted". I offered a plausible and logical explanation to your enquiry. Rowratty

6:37pm Tue 17 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

BecksH wrote:
A slightly different take on this... You'll know from my previous posts that I have been and remain strongly opposed to Highcrest's new admissions policy and the way in which it is disadvantaging local children. However, I see the school's recent Ofsted report far more as a reflection of the absurdity of the Ofsted process than of Highcrest. The report outlines many areas of Highcrest's progress and achievements - in teaching, in ethos and in behaviour, amongst others. To my mind, it just makes no sense to say that a school has 'good' teaching, behaviour management, etc. and then to say that attainment 'requires improvement'. This seems to be because while the report notes Highcrest's below average intake, it does not permit this as crucial context for some of the below average exam results. And the overall incoherence is made worse when elsewhere the report talks about the good progress being made by students in key areas, including English, maths and science, and from particular backgrounds. There is a wealth of research around how very hard it is for secondary schools to make up for learning deficits from a child's first 11 years, however outstanding the teaching. It seems to me that this understanding needs to be held in balance with keeping expectations high, and Ofsted do not get this right. Sadly the inspection process seems to be increasingly politicised and random. And it is hard-working teachers and children who are undermined and demoralised in the process. I'm sure Highcrest can and will take lessons from the report, but the fact is they have made huge progress over recent years and will always face steep challenges while they operate in a wholly selective system.
'Sadly the inspection process seems to be increasingly politicised and random.'

In what way 'BekcsH'?
[quote][p][bold]BecksH[/bold] wrote: A slightly different take on this... You'll know from my previous posts that I have been and remain strongly opposed to Highcrest's new admissions policy and the way in which it is disadvantaging local children. However, I see the school's recent Ofsted report far more as a reflection of the absurdity of the Ofsted process than of Highcrest. The report outlines many areas of Highcrest's progress and achievements - in teaching, in ethos and in behaviour, amongst others. To my mind, it just makes no sense to say that a school has 'good' teaching, behaviour management, etc. and then to say that attainment 'requires improvement'. This seems to be because while the report notes Highcrest's below average intake, it does not permit this as crucial context for some of the below average exam results. And the overall incoherence is made worse when elsewhere the report talks about the good progress being made by students in key areas, including English, maths and science, and from particular backgrounds. There is a wealth of research around how very hard it is for secondary schools to make up for learning deficits from a child's first 11 years, however outstanding the teaching. It seems to me that this understanding needs to be held in balance with keeping expectations high, and Ofsted do not get this right. Sadly the inspection process seems to be increasingly politicised and random. And it is hard-working teachers and children who are undermined and demoralised in the process. I'm sure Highcrest can and will take lessons from the report, but the fact is they have made huge progress over recent years and will always face steep challenges while they operate in a wholly selective system.[/p][/quote]'Sadly the inspection process seems to be increasingly politicised and random.' In what way 'BekcsH'? Undercover Euro Yob

6:38pm Tue 17 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

BucksResident wrote:
slickchick wrote: One of the problems is that the school introduced a banding system in the hope that they could reduce the number of local children attending and gain some brighter children from outlying areas. The schools publicity stated that the test was an alternative to the 11+ and children who qualified for grammar schools would choose Highcrest. Privately however, the senior staff anticipated that all the A &B band children who passed the 11+ would not come to Highcrest. In private conversations with the then governors, it was clear that the governors had no idea of how the banding tests would work in practice and they had not challenged the school principle and management to justify the proposed admission arrangements.. The school still puts out misleading information on it web site by stating that the tests did not disadvantage local children. Well 37 children who lived within a mile of the school were denied admission while other "preferred" children who lived at greater distances from the school were admitted. The school is now in serious danger of losing the support of the local community which will only make the situation worse.
May I just ask how you know what the senior staff thought/anticipated privately? And what was discussed in private conversations with the governors? Were you participating in these disucssions/conversa tions?
Whoever she is she makes comments in accordance with what commonsense would suggest.
[quote][p][bold]BucksResident[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]slickchick[/bold] wrote: One of the problems is that the school introduced a banding system in the hope that they could reduce the number of local children attending and gain some brighter children from outlying areas. The schools publicity stated that the test was an alternative to the 11+ and children who qualified for grammar schools would choose Highcrest. Privately however, the senior staff anticipated that all the A &B band children who passed the 11+ would not come to Highcrest. In private conversations with the then governors, it was clear that the governors had no idea of how the banding tests would work in practice and they had not challenged the school principle and management to justify the proposed admission arrangements.. The school still puts out misleading information on it web site by stating that the tests did not disadvantage local children. Well 37 children who lived within a mile of the school were denied admission while other "preferred" children who lived at greater distances from the school were admitted. The school is now in serious danger of losing the support of the local community which will only make the situation worse.[/p][/quote]May I just ask how you know what the senior staff thought/anticipated privately? And what was discussed in private conversations with the governors? Were you participating in these disucssions/conversa tions?[/p][/quote]Whoever she is she makes comments in accordance with what commonsense would suggest. Undercover Euro Yob

6:57pm Tue 17 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

Dickitdo wrote:
Me thinks some devious person has crept into a certain I .T Suite and has been messing with the voting results on this particular article , I wonder who would do that .?.
I've thought that too - unless some of the grammar school boys are all pressing the buttons at home instead of brooding on sex and football like normal kids (see comments by me and 'Bajina' on: http://www.bucksfree
press.co.uk/yoursay/
opinion/yourletters/
10864367.Abandon_the
_banding__take_in_lo
cal_children/)
[quote][p][bold]Dickitdo[/bold] wrote: Me thinks some devious person has crept into a certain I .T Suite and has been messing with the voting results on this particular article , I wonder who would do that .?.[/p][/quote]I've thought that too - unless some of the grammar school boys are all pressing the buttons at home instead of brooding on sex and football like normal kids (see comments by me and 'Bajina' on: http://www.bucksfree press.co.uk/yoursay/ opinion/yourletters/ 10864367.Abandon_the _banding__take_in_lo cal_children/) Undercover Euro Yob

7:24pm Tue 17 Dec 13

itstheprincipal says...

Wycombe-buddy said “Haha guess what they have also removed the "self evaluation executive summary" section today!” Oh how I bet they hated doing that!!!!
However for another piece of pulling the wool over the public’s eyes go to the awards section of their website, where they show us all the awards they currently hold & lo & behold yet again there we have ‘Ofsted Outstanding’. Miss Moynihan you are teaching all your children how to be dishonest. Come on Highcrest try being truthful in your advertising & change it ASAP to ‘Ofsted Requires Improvement’, you've had long enough so no excuses.
Wycombe-buddy said “Haha guess what they have also removed the "self evaluation executive summary" section today!” Oh how I bet they hated doing that!!!! However for another piece of pulling the wool over the public’s eyes go to the awards section of their website, where they show us all the awards they currently hold & lo & behold yet again there we have ‘Ofsted Outstanding’. Miss Moynihan you are teaching all your children how to be dishonest. Come on Highcrest try being truthful in your advertising & change it ASAP to ‘Ofsted Requires Improvement’, you've had long enough so no excuses. itstheprincipal

9:23pm Tue 17 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

wycombe123 wrote:
I have been at the Highcrest School for over 6 years I had no problems within those 6 years as in fact Highcrest made me achieve to the best of my ability and nothing less. I was currently a sixth form student at Highcrest though I have been recently "kicked out" as I have been classed as not being able to get my predicted grades by the end of my course. I find this extremely mind blowing as to how they have made this prediction within me being at the Highcrest sixth form for a short period of time (4 months). I had no prior warnings I had not been told by a single subject teacher that I was under achieving however not long before this decision was made I was told in an academic review day that my progress was “Outstanding”. It was all of a sudden that my parents got a call and were told to come in and have a meeting. Unaware of the scandalous news that I was about to receive I went to the meeting for a teacher who had no clue of my situation and was telling me I would fail my course’s. All he had was a piece of paper which had "Failed" written on it. His view and the views of my subject teachers were dissimilar I spoke to a certain subject teacher and even he was utterly shocked by the decision being made to remove me from Highcrest and was on side to say that he disagreed by the action that was being taken towards me . I was disgusted to the fact that they expected me to just up and leave without taking into consideration all the work I had put in in the previous 4 months. Also the timing in which they had kicked me out was atrocious I had nowhere to go no one would accept me at this time of the year which would mean waiting a whole academic year to start again when in actual fact this situation could have been avoided if more attention had been paid instead of just looking at the reputation of the school. I was particularly distressed about this decision, isn’t the whole idea of going to school for the teachers to show a positive attitude towards the students and to help them get the best possible grades. I received the opposite of this I got made to feel irrelevant and worthless during my short time at Highcrest. Nevertheless I will not stand to be told that I am “PREDICTED” to fail. I will fight for my place and to finish of my 2 year course. I will not waste a year of my education due to the lack of professionalism shown by Highcrest. This is my right and I will not stand by to be told I will fail.
I hope that - if you are right - then in your case right is might.
[quote][p][bold]wycombe123[/bold] wrote: I have been at the Highcrest School for over 6 years I had no problems within those 6 years as in fact Highcrest made me achieve to the best of my ability and nothing less. I was currently a sixth form student at Highcrest though I have been recently "kicked out" as I have been classed as not being able to get my predicted grades by the end of my course. I find this extremely mind blowing as to how they have made this prediction within me being at the Highcrest sixth form for a short period of time (4 months). I had no prior warnings I had not been told by a single subject teacher that I was under achieving however not long before this decision was made I was told in an academic review day that my progress was “Outstanding”. It was all of a sudden that my parents got a call and were told to come in and have a meeting. Unaware of the scandalous news that I was about to receive I went to the meeting for a teacher who had no clue of my situation and was telling me I would fail my course’s. All he had was a piece of paper which had "Failed" written on it. His view and the views of my subject teachers were dissimilar I spoke to a certain subject teacher and even he was utterly shocked by the decision being made to remove me from Highcrest and was on side to say that he disagreed by the action that was being taken towards me . I was disgusted to the fact that they expected me to just up and leave without taking into consideration all the work I had put in in the previous 4 months. Also the timing in which they had kicked me out was atrocious I had nowhere to go no one would accept me at this time of the year which would mean waiting a whole academic year to start again when in actual fact this situation could have been avoided if more attention had been paid instead of just looking at the reputation of the school. I was particularly distressed about this decision, isn’t the whole idea of going to school for the teachers to show a positive attitude towards the students and to help them get the best possible grades. I received the opposite of this I got made to feel irrelevant and worthless during my short time at Highcrest. Nevertheless I will not stand to be told that I am “PREDICTED” to fail. I will fight for my place and to finish of my 2 year course. I will not waste a year of my education due to the lack of professionalism shown by Highcrest. This is my right and I will not stand by to be told I will fail.[/p][/quote]I hope that - if you are right - then in your case right is might. Undercover Euro Yob

9:48pm Tue 17 Dec 13

BucksResident says...

Rowratty wrote:
BucksResident wrote:
I should imagine that the best person to comment on my query would be slick chick themselves. Any other comments are therefore purely speculative and unwarranted.
My apologies, I was under the mistaken impression that anyone was allowed to make a comment or voice an opinion.

I Agree with your "purely speculative" hence my use of the word "perhaps".
However, I would disagree with your use of "unwarranted". I offered a plausible and logical explanation to your enquiry.
Of course, opinion is fine, but should be stated as such. Not as if it is a fact. I would also ask you why you have suggested ex-staff/ex-governor
? On what basis have you formed this opinion? I can't see anything myself in slickchick's comments to suggest this. Could you perhaps please explain your logic then for this interpretation.
[quote][p][bold]Rowratty[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BucksResident[/bold] wrote: I should imagine that the best person to comment on my query would be slick chick themselves. Any other comments are therefore purely speculative and unwarranted.[/p][/quote]My apologies, I was under the mistaken impression that anyone was allowed to make a comment or voice an opinion. I Agree with your "purely speculative" hence my use of the word "perhaps". However, I would disagree with your use of "unwarranted". I offered a plausible and logical explanation to your enquiry.[/p][/quote]Of course, opinion is fine, but should be stated as such. Not as if it is a fact. I would also ask you why you have suggested ex-staff/ex-governor ? On what basis have you formed this opinion? I can't see anything myself in slickchick's comments to suggest this. Could you perhaps please explain your logic then for this interpretation. BucksResident

10:00pm Tue 17 Dec 13

BucksResident says...

Rowratty wrote:
BucksResident wrote:
I should imagine that the best person to comment on my query would be slick chick themselves. Any other comments are therefore purely speculative and unwarranted.
My apologies, I was under the mistaken impression that anyone was allowed to make a comment or voice an opinion.

I Agree with your "purely speculative" hence my use of the word "perhaps".
However, I would disagree with your use of "unwarranted". I offered a plausible and logical explanation to your enquiry.
Of course, opinion is fine, but should be stated as such. Not as if it is a fact. I would also ask you why you have suggested ex-staff/ex-governor
? On what basis have you formed this opinion? I can't see anything myself in slickchick's comments to suggest this. Could you perhaps please explain your logic then for this interpretation.
[quote][p][bold]Rowratty[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BucksResident[/bold] wrote: I should imagine that the best person to comment on my query would be slick chick themselves. Any other comments are therefore purely speculative and unwarranted.[/p][/quote]My apologies, I was under the mistaken impression that anyone was allowed to make a comment or voice an opinion. I Agree with your "purely speculative" hence my use of the word "perhaps". However, I would disagree with your use of "unwarranted". I offered a plausible and logical explanation to your enquiry.[/p][/quote]Of course, opinion is fine, but should be stated as such. Not as if it is a fact. I would also ask you why you have suggested ex-staff/ex-governor ? On what basis have you formed this opinion? I can't see anything myself in slickchick's comments to suggest this. Could you perhaps please explain your logic then for this interpretation. BucksResident

10:03pm Tue 17 Dec 13

BucksResident says...

BucksResident wrote:
Rowratty wrote:
BucksResident wrote:
I should imagine that the best person to comment on my query would be slick chick themselves. Any other comments are therefore purely speculative and unwarranted.
My apologies, I was under the mistaken impression that anyone was allowed to make a comment or voice an opinion.

I Agree with your "purely speculative" hence my use of the word "perhaps".
However, I would disagree with your use of "unwarranted". I offered a plausible and logical explanation to your enquiry.
Of course, opinion is fine, but should be stated as such. Not as if it is a fact. I would also ask you why you have suggested ex-staff/ex-governor

? On what basis have you formed this opinion? I can't see anything myself in slickchick's comments to suggest this. Could you perhaps please explain your logic then for this interpretation.
My apologies, to clarify, my question is why the "ex", why include this speculation?
[quote][p][bold]BucksResident[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rowratty[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BucksResident[/bold] wrote: I should imagine that the best person to comment on my query would be slick chick themselves. Any other comments are therefore purely speculative and unwarranted.[/p][/quote]My apologies, I was under the mistaken impression that anyone was allowed to make a comment or voice an opinion. I Agree with your "purely speculative" hence my use of the word "perhaps". However, I would disagree with your use of "unwarranted". I offered a plausible and logical explanation to your enquiry.[/p][/quote]Of course, opinion is fine, but should be stated as such. Not as if it is a fact. I would also ask you why you have suggested ex-staff/ex-governor ? On what basis have you formed this opinion? I can't see anything myself in slickchick's comments to suggest this. Could you perhaps please explain your logic then for this interpretation.[/p][/quote]My apologies, to clarify, my question is why the "ex", why include this speculation? BucksResident

10:06pm Tue 17 Dec 13

Dickitdo says...

listerps2 wrote:
Why hasn't the Bucks Free Press reported on all the other Ofsted Inspections that have happened lately - St Michael's had theirs before half term and received "Good" for everything.
The Bucks Free Press Possibly do not comment on Divine Intervention
[quote][p][bold]listerps2[/bold] wrote: Why hasn't the Bucks Free Press reported on all the other Ofsted Inspections that have happened lately - St Michael's had theirs before half term and received "Good" for everything.[/p][/quote]The Bucks Free Press Possibly do not comment on Divine Intervention Dickitdo

10:19pm Tue 17 Dec 13

Dickitdo says...

Bajina wrote:
listerps2 wrote:
Why hasn't the Bucks Free Press reported on all the other Ofsted Inspections that have happened lately - St Michael's had theirs before half term and received "Good" for everything.
Well done, St Michael's School.
The Bucks Free Press Possibly do not comment on Divine Intervention
[quote][p][bold]Bajina[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]listerps2[/bold] wrote: Why hasn't the Bucks Free Press reported on all the other Ofsted Inspections that have happened lately - St Michael's had theirs before half term and received "Good" for everything.[/p][/quote]Well done, St Michael's School.[/p][/quote]The Bucks Free Press Possibly do not comment on Divine Intervention Dickitdo

10:24pm Tue 17 Dec 13

Wycombe-buddy says...

Schools nowadays test your memory not your intelligence. . It doesnt matter if you learn or not.. you just memorise from a book and sit your exam.
Schools nowadays test your memory not your intelligence. . It doesnt matter if you learn or not.. you just memorise from a book and sit your exam. Wycombe-buddy

10:41pm Tue 17 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

BucksResident wrote:
Rowratty wrote:
BucksResident wrote:
I should imagine that the best person to comment on my query would be slick chick themselves. Any other comments are therefore purely speculative and unwarranted.
My apologies, I was under the mistaken impression that anyone was allowed to make a comment or voice an opinion.

I Agree with your "purely speculative" hence my use of the word "perhaps".
However, I would disagree with your use of "unwarranted". I offered a plausible and logical explanation to your enquiry.
Of course, opinion is fine, but should be stated as such. Not as if it is a fact. I would also ask you why you have suggested ex-staff/ex-governor

? On what basis have you formed this opinion? I can't see anything myself in slickchick's comments to suggest this. Could you perhaps please explain your logic then for this interpretation.
As I said above whoever she is she makes comments in accordance with what commonsense would suggest. If she is a current or serving education service emplyee or governor she might be well-advised to ignore 'Bucks Residents' enquiry to disclose her identity.
[quote][p][bold]BucksResident[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rowratty[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BucksResident[/bold] wrote: I should imagine that the best person to comment on my query would be slick chick themselves. Any other comments are therefore purely speculative and unwarranted.[/p][/quote]My apologies, I was under the mistaken impression that anyone was allowed to make a comment or voice an opinion. I Agree with your "purely speculative" hence my use of the word "perhaps". However, I would disagree with your use of "unwarranted". I offered a plausible and logical explanation to your enquiry.[/p][/quote]Of course, opinion is fine, but should be stated as such. Not as if it is a fact. I would also ask you why you have suggested ex-staff/ex-governor ? On what basis have you formed this opinion? I can't see anything myself in slickchick's comments to suggest this. Could you perhaps please explain your logic then for this interpretation.[/p][/quote]As I said above whoever she is she makes comments in accordance with what commonsense would suggest. If she is a current or serving education service emplyee or governor she might be well-advised to ignore 'Bucks Residents' enquiry to disclose her identity. Undercover Euro Yob

11:17pm Tue 17 Dec 13

itstheprincipal says...

Wycombe123 my heart goes out to you, there can be no excuse whatsoever the way Highcrest have treated you, Miss Moynihan & her team should be ashamed. But this seems to be the norm with her now, children are not pupils to her, they are purely exam results. If your results don’t fit then she doesn’t waste time on the children that need help, oh no! that would be much too much like hard work, so she ‘invented’ the banding tests so that she can ‘buy’ in the results she yearns for.
This is happening all too often now especially with the sixth form, no wonder it’s virtually none existent. At this rate there will be nobody left in sixth form when they are re-inspected by Ofsted. I bet they are begging this year’s year 11s to stay on.
It is a sad state of affairs when the school are messing up pupil’s futures with no remorse at all, but this seems the condescending attitude they have to all the pupils & parents.
My advice to you Wycombe123 is don’t give up, don’t write yourself off, try & get in at a different Sixth Form, one that cares & that actually invests time in your future. If you feel Highcrest owe you your education then contact Bucks County Council, Ofsted & also enquire at a solicitor you may find you have grounds to take action.
Good Luck
Wycombe123 my heart goes out to you, there can be no excuse whatsoever the way Highcrest have treated you, Miss Moynihan & her team should be ashamed. But this seems to be the norm with her now, children are not pupils to her, they are purely exam results. If your results don’t fit then she doesn’t waste time on the children that need help, oh no! that would be much too much like hard work, so she ‘invented’ the banding tests so that she can ‘buy’ in the results she yearns for. This is happening all too often now especially with the sixth form, no wonder it’s virtually none existent. At this rate there will be nobody left in sixth form when they are re-inspected by Ofsted. I bet they are begging this year’s year 11s to stay on. It is a sad state of affairs when the school are messing up pupil’s futures with no remorse at all, but this seems the condescending attitude they have to all the pupils & parents. My advice to you Wycombe123 is don’t give up, don’t write yourself off, try & get in at a different Sixth Form, one that cares & that actually invests time in your future. If you feel Highcrest owe you your education then contact Bucks County Council, Ofsted & also enquire at a solicitor you may find you have grounds to take action. Good Luck itstheprincipal

11:39pm Tue 17 Dec 13

Rowratty says...

BucksResident wrote:
BucksResident wrote:
Rowratty wrote:
BucksResident wrote:
I should imagine that the best person to comment on my query would be slick chick themselves. Any other comments are therefore purely speculative and unwarranted.
My apologies, I was under the mistaken impression that anyone was allowed to make a comment or voice an opinion.

I Agree with your "purely speculative" hence my use of the word "perhaps".
However, I would disagree with your use of "unwarranted". I offered a plausible and logical explanation to your enquiry.
Of course, opinion is fine, but should be stated as such. Not as if it is a fact. I would also ask you why you have suggested ex-staff/ex-governor


? On what basis have you formed this opinion? I can't see anything myself in slickchick's comments to suggest this. Could you perhaps please explain your logic then for this interpretation.
My apologies, to clarify, my question is why the "ex", why include this speculation?
You are correct. There is nothing whatsoever in slickchicks comment to suggest that slickchick is or is not an ex-governor or a ex-staff member. That was an assumption on my part.

It is however safe to assume that slickchick is a close friend or an associate of one or more ex-governors and that the ex-governors are willing to share with slickchick, during private conversations, concerns that they, the ex-governors, may have.
Now, ex-governors do not wander around the County discussing the events or minutes of conversations held during School/Governor meetings nor do they 'pop down the pub' to discuss their concerns with the local bar staff so, I assumed that the ex-governor would confide in either another member of the governing body or a member of the staff, ex- or otherwise.

I would ask why the Governors are not raising their concerns with the SLT or indeed the LEA?

So, possible answers to the first two questions that you raised... "May I just ask how you know what the senior staff thought/anticipated privately?
And, what was discussed in private conversations with the governors? "

The thoughts and anticipations of the senior staff have, perhaps during Governors meetings at the school, been made known to the now ex-governors and that the ex-governors have, at some later date during private conversations with slickchick, passed on this information, i.e. the thoughts and anticipations of the senior staff, along with their own personal concerns.

Were you participating in these discussions/conversa
tions?
Is it not obvious that slickclick was participating in these discussions/conversa
tions, how else could slickchick be made aware of the concerns raised by the ex-governors?
[quote][p][bold]BucksResident[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BucksResident[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rowratty[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BucksResident[/bold] wrote: I should imagine that the best person to comment on my query would be slick chick themselves. Any other comments are therefore purely speculative and unwarranted.[/p][/quote]My apologies, I was under the mistaken impression that anyone was allowed to make a comment or voice an opinion. I Agree with your "purely speculative" hence my use of the word "perhaps". However, I would disagree with your use of "unwarranted". I offered a plausible and logical explanation to your enquiry.[/p][/quote]Of course, opinion is fine, but should be stated as such. Not as if it is a fact. I would also ask you why you have suggested ex-staff/ex-governor ? On what basis have you formed this opinion? I can't see anything myself in slickchick's comments to suggest this. Could you perhaps please explain your logic then for this interpretation.[/p][/quote]My apologies, to clarify, my question is why the "ex", why include this speculation?[/p][/quote]You are correct. There is nothing whatsoever in slickchicks comment to suggest that slickchick is or is not an ex-governor or a ex-staff member. That was an assumption on my part. It is however safe to assume that slickchick is a close friend or an associate of one or more ex-governors and that the ex-governors are willing to share with slickchick, during private conversations, concerns that they, the ex-governors, may have. Now, ex-governors do not wander around the County discussing the events or minutes of conversations held during School/Governor meetings nor do they 'pop down the pub' to discuss their concerns with the local bar staff so, I assumed that the ex-governor would confide in either another member of the governing body or a member of the staff, ex- or otherwise. I would ask why the Governors are not raising their concerns with the SLT or indeed the LEA? So, possible answers to the first two questions that you raised... "May I just ask how you know what the senior staff thought/anticipated privately? And, what was discussed in private conversations with the governors? " The thoughts and anticipations of the senior staff have, perhaps during Governors meetings at the school, been made known to the now ex-governors and that the ex-governors have, at some later date during private conversations with slickchick, passed on this information, i.e. the thoughts and anticipations of the senior staff, along with their own personal concerns. Were you participating in these discussions/conversa tions? Is it not obvious that slickclick was participating in these discussions/conversa tions, how else could slickchick be made aware of the concerns raised by the ex-governors? Rowratty

11:45pm Tue 17 Dec 13

informedlocal says...

Highcrest repeatedly achieves one of the highest value added scores of any school in the county let alone the local area. I have little doubt it will continue to do so gaining good results for the pupils who attend.
Those people who have posted derogatory comments would do well to reflect on their motives. Do they really want to cause pain to staff doing their best for one of our local secondary schools or the pupils who attend it?
Highcrest repeatedly achieves one of the highest value added scores of any school in the county let alone the local area. I have little doubt it will continue to do so gaining good results for the pupils who attend. Those people who have posted derogatory comments would do well to reflect on their motives. Do they really want to cause pain to staff doing their best for one of our local secondary schools or the pupils who attend it? informedlocal

7:03am Wed 18 Dec 13

BucksResident says...

Undercover Euro Yob wrote:
BucksResident wrote:
Rowratty wrote:
BucksResident wrote:
I should imagine that the best person to comment on my query would be slick chick themselves. Any other comments are therefore purely speculative and unwarranted.
My apologies, I was under the mistaken impression that anyone was allowed to make a comment or voice an opinion.

I Agree with your "purely speculative" hence my use of the word "perhaps".
However, I would disagree with your use of "unwarranted". I offered a plausible and logical explanation to your enquiry.
Of course, opinion is fine, but should be stated as such. Not as if it is a fact. I would also ask you why you have suggested ex-staff/ex-governor


? On what basis have you formed this opinion? I can't see anything myself in slickchick's comments to suggest this. Could you perhaps please explain your logic then for this interpretation.
As I said above whoever she is she makes comments in accordance with what commonsense would suggest. If she is a current or serving education service emplyee or governor she might be well-advised to ignore 'Bucks Residents' enquiry to disclose her identity.
I never asked anyone to expose their idenity, instead my query was how they would know the private thoughts and dicussions of others. I think that's a fair questions, as opinions differ to facts.
[quote][p][bold]Undercover Euro Yob[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BucksResident[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rowratty[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BucksResident[/bold] wrote: I should imagine that the best person to comment on my query would be slick chick themselves. Any other comments are therefore purely speculative and unwarranted.[/p][/quote]My apologies, I was under the mistaken impression that anyone was allowed to make a comment or voice an opinion. I Agree with your "purely speculative" hence my use of the word "perhaps". However, I would disagree with your use of "unwarranted". I offered a plausible and logical explanation to your enquiry.[/p][/quote]Of course, opinion is fine, but should be stated as such. Not as if it is a fact. I would also ask you why you have suggested ex-staff/ex-governor ? On what basis have you formed this opinion? I can't see anything myself in slickchick's comments to suggest this. Could you perhaps please explain your logic then for this interpretation.[/p][/quote]As I said above whoever she is she makes comments in accordance with what commonsense would suggest. If she is a current or serving education service emplyee or governor she might be well-advised to ignore 'Bucks Residents' enquiry to disclose her identity.[/p][/quote]I never asked anyone to expose their idenity, instead my query was how they would know the private thoughts and dicussions of others. I think that's a fair questions, as opinions differ to facts. BucksResident

8:32am Wed 18 Dec 13

FairAndNotSoSquare says...

Marmite XO wrote:
As long as the Grammar Schools are doing well, what is the problem? By the time the failures go to schools like Highcrest, they are already lost causes. As long as they get enough support to steer them away from a life of crime, the school has done its job.
Oh Marmite XO, what a charmer you are eh?! "Failures"? "Lost causes"? My son has recently finished sixth form at Highcrest where he obtained good grades in A levels, including Maths as one of his subjects. He's just finished his first term at University, very successfully! I wouldn't exactly call him a "failure" or a "lost cause", would you?! I look forward to your apology (although I doubt it will be forthcoming!) Merry Christmas! Oh and maybe think about a New Year resolution about how to be a nicer person? Less judgmental maybe?!
[quote][p][bold]Marmite XO[/bold] wrote: As long as the Grammar Schools are doing well, what is the problem? By the time the failures go to schools like Highcrest, they are already lost causes. As long as they get enough support to steer them away from a life of crime, the school has done its job.[/p][/quote]Oh Marmite XO, what a charmer you are eh?! "Failures"? "Lost causes"? My son has recently finished sixth form at Highcrest where he obtained good grades in A levels, including Maths as one of his subjects. He's just finished his first term at University, very successfully! I wouldn't exactly call him a "failure" or a "lost cause", would you?! I look forward to your apology (although I doubt it will be forthcoming!) Merry Christmas! Oh and maybe think about a New Year resolution about how to be a nicer person? Less judgmental maybe?! FairAndNotSoSquare

10:30am Wed 18 Dec 13

BecksH says...

Undercover Euro Yob wrote:
BecksH wrote:
A slightly different take on this... You'll know from my previous posts that I have been and remain strongly opposed to Highcrest's new admissions policy and the way in which it is disadvantaging local children. However, I see the school's recent Ofsted report far more as a reflection of the absurdity of the Ofsted process than of Highcrest. The report outlines many areas of Highcrest's progress and achievements - in teaching, in ethos and in behaviour, amongst others. To my mind, it just makes no sense to say that a school has 'good' teaching, behaviour management, etc. and then to say that attainment 'requires improvement'. This seems to be because while the report notes Highcrest's below average intake, it does not permit this as crucial context for some of the below average exam results. And the overall incoherence is made worse when elsewhere the report talks about the good progress being made by students in key areas, including English, maths and science, and from particular backgrounds. There is a wealth of research around how very hard it is for secondary schools to make up for learning deficits from a child's first 11 years, however outstanding the teaching. It seems to me that this understanding needs to be held in balance with keeping expectations high, and Ofsted do not get this right. Sadly the inspection process seems to be increasingly politicised and random. And it is hard-working teachers and children who are undermined and demoralised in the process. I'm sure Highcrest can and will take lessons from the report, but the fact is they have made huge progress over recent years and will always face steep challenges while they operate in a wholly selective system.
'Sadly the inspection process seems to be increasingly politicised and random.'

In what way 'BekcsH'?
Good question. More and more, Ofsted seems to be an instrument of government to push political agendas when, in my view, it should be wholly independent from politicians. For instance, it has become a tool in forced academisations and has been used to drive Gove's agendas around teacher's pay and teacher training. It is difficult for schools to take Ofsted's judgements seriously when they feel the inspectors are dancing to the tunes of politicians who often don't have the first idea about what it takes to deliver an effective education in tough circumstances.

My understanding is that most recently Ofsted's new guidance says that schools achieving beneath the national average in attainment must receive 'requires improvement'. That is ludicrous. It takes no account of the wide range of factors outside the school's control that will affect attainment - social background, language, prior attainment and (in selective areas) having an intake that does not in any way reflect the full ability range.

It is also ludicrous because by measuring schools against a national average, the whole system could be improving but the same proportion of schools will receive 'requires improvement'. Gove was taken to task over his apparent inability to understand this statistical fact by the Education Select Committee.

So while our local grammar schools can mask poor teaching and receive 'good' or 'outstanding' based on the mere fact they have creamed off the top 30%, local secondary schools that add significant value and are often achieving incredible results when you look at the starting points of the children, are told they require improvement.

We need our best teachers to be in our most difficult schools - but why will they go there if they know that how ever good a job they do they will be judged to 'require improvement'?

I really hope that people locally who have seen the journey of Highcrest over the past 10 years, will therfore be wise enough not to use this Ofsted report as a stick with which to beat the school.
[quote][p][bold]Undercover Euro Yob[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BecksH[/bold] wrote: A slightly different take on this... You'll know from my previous posts that I have been and remain strongly opposed to Highcrest's new admissions policy and the way in which it is disadvantaging local children. However, I see the school's recent Ofsted report far more as a reflection of the absurdity of the Ofsted process than of Highcrest. The report outlines many areas of Highcrest's progress and achievements - in teaching, in ethos and in behaviour, amongst others. To my mind, it just makes no sense to say that a school has 'good' teaching, behaviour management, etc. and then to say that attainment 'requires improvement'. This seems to be because while the report notes Highcrest's below average intake, it does not permit this as crucial context for some of the below average exam results. And the overall incoherence is made worse when elsewhere the report talks about the good progress being made by students in key areas, including English, maths and science, and from particular backgrounds. There is a wealth of research around how very hard it is for secondary schools to make up for learning deficits from a child's first 11 years, however outstanding the teaching. It seems to me that this understanding needs to be held in balance with keeping expectations high, and Ofsted do not get this right. Sadly the inspection process seems to be increasingly politicised and random. And it is hard-working teachers and children who are undermined and demoralised in the process. I'm sure Highcrest can and will take lessons from the report, but the fact is they have made huge progress over recent years and will always face steep challenges while they operate in a wholly selective system.[/p][/quote]'Sadly the inspection process seems to be increasingly politicised and random.' In what way 'BekcsH'?[/p][/quote]Good question. More and more, Ofsted seems to be an instrument of government to push political agendas when, in my view, it should be wholly independent from politicians. For instance, it has become a tool in forced academisations and has been used to drive Gove's agendas around teacher's pay and teacher training. It is difficult for schools to take Ofsted's judgements seriously when they feel the inspectors are dancing to the tunes of politicians who often don't have the first idea about what it takes to deliver an effective education in tough circumstances. My understanding is that most recently Ofsted's new guidance says that schools achieving beneath the national average in attainment must receive 'requires improvement'. That is ludicrous. It takes no account of the wide range of factors outside the school's control that will affect attainment - social background, language, prior attainment and (in selective areas) having an intake that does not in any way reflect the full ability range. It is also ludicrous because by measuring schools against a national average, the whole system could be improving but the same proportion of schools will receive 'requires improvement'. Gove was taken to task over his apparent inability to understand this statistical fact by the Education Select Committee. So while our local grammar schools can mask poor teaching and receive 'good' or 'outstanding' based on the mere fact they have creamed off the top 30%, local secondary schools that add significant value and are often achieving incredible results when you look at the starting points of the children, are told they require improvement. We need our best teachers to be in our most difficult schools - but why will they go there if they know that how ever good a job they do they will be judged to 'require improvement'? I really hope that people locally who have seen the journey of Highcrest over the past 10 years, will therfore be wise enough not to use this Ofsted report as a stick with which to beat the school. BecksH

12:39pm Wed 18 Dec 13

firminafirm says...

Marmite XO wrote:
As long as the Grammar Schools are doing well, what is the problem? By the time the failures go to schools like Highcrest, they are already lost causes. As long as they get enough support to steer them away from a life of crime, the school has done its job.
What a knob or is he/she being ironic ?
[quote][p][bold]Marmite XO[/bold] wrote: As long as the Grammar Schools are doing well, what is the problem? By the time the failures go to schools like Highcrest, they are already lost causes. As long as they get enough support to steer them away from a life of crime, the school has done its job.[/p][/quote]What a knob or is he/she being ironic ? firminafirm

1:46pm Wed 18 Dec 13

wycombe user says...

Last week a group of 6th formers had lost their places at the Highcrest 6th form. They were told that they were going to fail in their exams and that there was no point for them to carry on with the courses they were doing.



Due to being a 6th former myself and being told this made me lose confidence in myself. I felt useless and not wanted. I was told that I had a meeting last Thursday which my parents also had to attend. I had no clue at that moment in time that my place at 6th form was at threat. When entering my meeting I was told to sit down by my head of learning. I was then given a letter which informed me that Highcrest could not accept me anymore as apparently I was underachieving. I was completely broken at that time as I had hoped that the meeting was to tell me and my parents in how well I was doing. After the devastating event had taken place I still on numerous occasions went to the school pleading them to accept me. However each time I went I was told that no one could see me.



I then with other students booked an appointment with my head of learning asking them as in why I had got kicked out. I was then told that my subject teachers had said I was not putting enough effort in my work and the fact that I was under achieving. Due to being shocked at this statement, we went to speak to our subject teachers where they were also shocked and had said they had never said such a thing.



I then spoke to my head of learning regarding this matter, where he said that he had made his final decision and wasn’t going to make any alterations knowing that the data sheet he had given me was wrong and was not updated from the beginning of the year.



As dedicated individuals we believe that no student should be asked to leave if they are under achieving instead the school should support them and motivate them getting the grades required.



Due to the school not getting an outstanding report from Ofsted, kicking 6th formers out will not help them make the school better.



If we did not care about our education then none of us would have gone back to school on numerous occasions to fight for our places.



Students need support, encouragement and motivation from their teachers who are there to help in their learning and in particularly in this situation



Highcrest’s mission statement is to achieve and learn but how can we do this if we are not given the chance? Highcrest has told its students that they are entering a place to succeed? How is this possible if students are told that they are going to fail? No student should be allowed to feel this way.



Due to being thrown out of school at such a late time it is not possible for other schools to accept us at this time. Therefore this may result us wasting a whole year of our valuable education. Everyone deserves a second chance and therefore we are requesting for our places back
Last week a group of 6th formers had lost their places at the Highcrest 6th form. They were told that they were going to fail in their exams and that there was no point for them to carry on with the courses they were doing. Due to being a 6th former myself and being told this made me lose confidence in myself. I felt useless and not wanted. I was told that I had a meeting last Thursday which my parents also had to attend. I had no clue at that moment in time that my place at 6th form was at threat. When entering my meeting I was told to sit down by my head of learning. I was then given a letter which informed me that Highcrest could not accept me anymore as apparently I was underachieving. I was completely broken at that time as I had hoped that the meeting was to tell me and my parents in how well I was doing. After the devastating event had taken place I still on numerous occasions went to the school pleading them to accept me. However each time I went I was told that no one could see me. I then with other students booked an appointment with my head of learning asking them as in why I had got kicked out. I was then told that my subject teachers had said I was not putting enough effort in my work and the fact that I was under achieving. Due to being shocked at this statement, we went to speak to our subject teachers where they were also shocked and had said they had never said such a thing. I then spoke to my head of learning regarding this matter, where he said that he had made his final decision and wasn’t going to make any alterations knowing that the data sheet he had given me was wrong and was not updated from the beginning of the year. As dedicated individuals we believe that no student should be asked to leave if they are under achieving instead the school should support them and motivate them getting the grades required. Due to the school not getting an outstanding report from Ofsted, kicking 6th formers out will not help them make the school better. If we did not care about our education then none of us would have gone back to school on numerous occasions to fight for our places. Students need support, encouragement and motivation from their teachers who are there to help in their learning and in particularly in this situation Highcrest’s mission statement is to achieve and learn but how can we do this if we are not given the chance? Highcrest has told its students that they are entering a place to succeed? How is this possible if students are told that they are going to fail? No student should be allowed to feel this way. Due to being thrown out of school at such a late time it is not possible for other schools to accept us at this time. Therefore this may result us wasting a whole year of our valuable education. Everyone deserves a second chance and therefore we are requesting for our places back wycombe user

1:48pm Wed 18 Dec 13

wycombe user says...

Undercover Euro Yob wrote:
wycombe123 wrote:
I have been at the Highcrest School for over 6 years I had no problems within those 6 years as in fact Highcrest made me achieve to the best of my ability and nothing less. I was currently a sixth form student at Highcrest though I have been recently "kicked out" as I have been classed as not being able to get my predicted grades by the end of my course. I find this extremely mind blowing as to how they have made this prediction within me being at the Highcrest sixth form for a short period of time (4 months). I had no prior warnings I had not been told by a single subject teacher that I was under achieving however not long before this decision was made I was told in an academic review day that my progress was “Outstanding”. It was all of a sudden that my parents got a call and were told to come in and have a meeting. Unaware of the scandalous news that I was about to receive I went to the meeting for a teacher who had no clue of my situation and was telling me I would fail my course’s. All he had was a piece of paper which had "Failed" written on it. His view and the views of my subject teachers were dissimilar I spoke to a certain subject teacher and even he was utterly shocked by the decision being made to remove me from Highcrest and was on side to say that he disagreed by the action that was being taken towards me . I was disgusted to the fact that they expected me to just up and leave without taking into consideration all the work I had put in in the previous 4 months. Also the timing in which they had kicked me out was atrocious I had nowhere to go no one would accept me at this time of the year which would mean waiting a whole academic year to start again when in actual fact this situation could have been avoided if more attention had been paid instead of just looking at the reputation of the school. I was particularly distressed about this decision, isn’t the whole idea of going to school for the teachers to show a positive attitude towards the students and to help them get the best possible grades. I received the opposite of this I got made to feel irrelevant and worthless during my short time at Highcrest. Nevertheless I will not stand to be told that I am “PREDICTED” to fail. I will fight for my place and to finish of my 2 year course. I will not waste a year of my education due to the lack of professionalism shown by Highcrest. This is my right and I will not stand by to be told I will fail.
I hope that - if you are right - then in your case right is might.
i am a 6th former aswell action will be taken soon do not worry :)
[quote][p][bold]Undercover Euro Yob[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wycombe123[/bold] wrote: I have been at the Highcrest School for over 6 years I had no problems within those 6 years as in fact Highcrest made me achieve to the best of my ability and nothing less. I was currently a sixth form student at Highcrest though I have been recently "kicked out" as I have been classed as not being able to get my predicted grades by the end of my course. I find this extremely mind blowing as to how they have made this prediction within me being at the Highcrest sixth form for a short period of time (4 months). I had no prior warnings I had not been told by a single subject teacher that I was under achieving however not long before this decision was made I was told in an academic review day that my progress was “Outstanding”. It was all of a sudden that my parents got a call and were told to come in and have a meeting. Unaware of the scandalous news that I was about to receive I went to the meeting for a teacher who had no clue of my situation and was telling me I would fail my course’s. All he had was a piece of paper which had "Failed" written on it. His view and the views of my subject teachers were dissimilar I spoke to a certain subject teacher and even he was utterly shocked by the decision being made to remove me from Highcrest and was on side to say that he disagreed by the action that was being taken towards me . I was disgusted to the fact that they expected me to just up and leave without taking into consideration all the work I had put in in the previous 4 months. Also the timing in which they had kicked me out was atrocious I had nowhere to go no one would accept me at this time of the year which would mean waiting a whole academic year to start again when in actual fact this situation could have been avoided if more attention had been paid instead of just looking at the reputation of the school. I was particularly distressed about this decision, isn’t the whole idea of going to school for the teachers to show a positive attitude towards the students and to help them get the best possible grades. I received the opposite of this I got made to feel irrelevant and worthless during my short time at Highcrest. Nevertheless I will not stand to be told that I am “PREDICTED” to fail. I will fight for my place and to finish of my 2 year course. I will not waste a year of my education due to the lack of professionalism shown by Highcrest. This is my right and I will not stand by to be told I will fail.[/p][/quote]I hope that - if you are right - then in your case right is might.[/p][/quote]i am a 6th former aswell action will be taken soon do not worry :) wycombe user

7:28pm Wed 18 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

BucksResident wrote:
Undercover Euro Yob wrote:
BucksResident wrote:
Rowratty wrote:
BucksResident wrote:
I should imagine that the best person to comment on my query would be slick chick themselves. Any other comments are therefore purely speculative and unwarranted.
My apologies, I was under the mistaken impression that anyone was allowed to make a comment or voice an opinion.

I Agree with your "purely speculative" hence my use of the word "perhaps".
However, I would disagree with your use of "unwarranted". I offered a plausible and logical explanation to your enquiry.
Of course, opinion is fine, but should be stated as such. Not as if it is a fact. I would also ask you why you have suggested ex-staff/ex-governor



? On what basis have you formed this opinion? I can't see anything myself in slickchick's comments to suggest this. Could you perhaps please explain your logic then for this interpretation.
As I said above whoever she is she makes comments in accordance with what commonsense would suggest. If she is a current or serving education service emplyee or governor she might be well-advised to ignore 'Bucks Residents' enquiry to disclose her identity.
I never asked anyone to expose their idenity, instead my query was how they would know the private thoughts and dicussions of others. I think that's a fair questions, as opinions differ to facts.
That's right - slickchick could say 'no names mentioned but I was the headmaster's secretary or chairman of the governors or whatever' - then we would not know who she is but we could be sure she knew what she was talking about.
[quote][p][bold]BucksResident[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Undercover Euro Yob[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BucksResident[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rowratty[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BucksResident[/bold] wrote: I should imagine that the best person to comment on my query would be slick chick themselves. Any other comments are therefore purely speculative and unwarranted.[/p][/quote]My apologies, I was under the mistaken impression that anyone was allowed to make a comment or voice an opinion. I Agree with your "purely speculative" hence my use of the word "perhaps". However, I would disagree with your use of "unwarranted". I offered a plausible and logical explanation to your enquiry.[/p][/quote]Of course, opinion is fine, but should be stated as such. Not as if it is a fact. I would also ask you why you have suggested ex-staff/ex-governor ? On what basis have you formed this opinion? I can't see anything myself in slickchick's comments to suggest this. Could you perhaps please explain your logic then for this interpretation.[/p][/quote]As I said above whoever she is she makes comments in accordance with what commonsense would suggest. If she is a current or serving education service emplyee or governor she might be well-advised to ignore 'Bucks Residents' enquiry to disclose her identity.[/p][/quote]I never asked anyone to expose their idenity, instead my query was how they would know the private thoughts and dicussions of others. I think that's a fair questions, as opinions differ to facts.[/p][/quote]That's right - slickchick could say 'no names mentioned but I was the headmaster's secretary or chairman of the governors or whatever' - then we would not know who she is but we could be sure she knew what she was talking about. Undercover Euro Yob

7:40pm Wed 18 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

BecksH wrote:
Undercover Euro Yob wrote:
BecksH wrote:
A slightly different take on this... You'll know from my previous posts that I have been and remain strongly opposed to Highcrest's new admissions policy and the way in which it is disadvantaging local children. However, I see the school's recent Ofsted report far more as a reflection of the absurdity of the Ofsted process than of Highcrest. The report outlines many areas of Highcrest's progress and achievements - in teaching, in ethos and in behaviour, amongst others. To my mind, it just makes no sense to say that a school has 'good' teaching, behaviour management, etc. and then to say that attainment 'requires improvement'. This seems to be because while the report notes Highcrest's below average intake, it does not permit this as crucial context for some of the below average exam results. And the overall incoherence is made worse when elsewhere the report talks about the good progress being made by students in key areas, including English, maths and science, and from particular backgrounds. There is a wealth of research around how very hard it is for secondary schools to make up for learning deficits from a child's first 11 years, however outstanding the teaching. It seems to me that this understanding needs to be held in balance with keeping expectations high, and Ofsted do not get this right. Sadly the inspection process seems to be increasingly politicised and random. And it is hard-working teachers and children who are undermined and demoralised in the process. I'm sure Highcrest can and will take lessons from the report, but the fact is they have made huge progress over recent years and will always face steep challenges while they operate in a wholly selective system.
'Sadly the inspection process seems to be increasingly politicised and random.'

In what way 'BekcsH'?
Good question. More and more, Ofsted seems to be an instrument of government to push political agendas when, in my view, it should be wholly independent from politicians. For instance, it has become a tool in forced academisations and has been used to drive Gove's agendas around teacher's pay and teacher training. It is difficult for schools to take Ofsted's judgements seriously when they feel the inspectors are dancing to the tunes of politicians who often don't have the first idea about what it takes to deliver an effective education in tough circumstances.

My understanding is that most recently Ofsted's new guidance says that schools achieving beneath the national average in attainment must receive 'requires improvement'. That is ludicrous. It takes no account of the wide range of factors outside the school's control that will affect attainment - social background, language, prior attainment and (in selective areas) having an intake that does not in any way reflect the full ability range.

It is also ludicrous because by measuring schools against a national average, the whole system could be improving but the same proportion of schools will receive 'requires improvement'. Gove was taken to task over his apparent inability to understand this statistical fact by the Education Select Committee.

So while our local grammar schools can mask poor teaching and receive 'good' or 'outstanding' based on the mere fact they have creamed off the top 30%, local secondary schools that add significant value and are often achieving incredible results when you look at the starting points of the children, are told they require improvement.

We need our best teachers to be in our most difficult schools - but why will they go there if they know that how ever good a job they do they will be judged to 'require improvement'?

I really hope that people locally who have seen the journey of Highcrest over the past 10 years, will therfore be wise enough not to use this Ofsted report as a stick with which to beat the school.
Thanks.

My beef with Highcrest is that it is part of a discredited (in my view and that of many others) system that creams off the top 30% and hothouses them and gives the remaining 70% the least it can manage to give.


The BFP has written about Highcrest as if it were remedying this injustice by reform from within and the schemes announced by Highcrest don't make sense - how can you undermine grammar schools by further fragmenting by selection those who have failed the 11+?
[quote][p][bold]BecksH[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Undercover Euro Yob[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BecksH[/bold] wrote: A slightly different take on this... You'll know from my previous posts that I have been and remain strongly opposed to Highcrest's new admissions policy and the way in which it is disadvantaging local children. However, I see the school's recent Ofsted report far more as a reflection of the absurdity of the Ofsted process than of Highcrest. The report outlines many areas of Highcrest's progress and achievements - in teaching, in ethos and in behaviour, amongst others. To my mind, it just makes no sense to say that a school has 'good' teaching, behaviour management, etc. and then to say that attainment 'requires improvement'. This seems to be because while the report notes Highcrest's below average intake, it does not permit this as crucial context for some of the below average exam results. And the overall incoherence is made worse when elsewhere the report talks about the good progress being made by students in key areas, including English, maths and science, and from particular backgrounds. There is a wealth of research around how very hard it is for secondary schools to make up for learning deficits from a child's first 11 years, however outstanding the teaching. It seems to me that this understanding needs to be held in balance with keeping expectations high, and Ofsted do not get this right. Sadly the inspection process seems to be increasingly politicised and random. And it is hard-working teachers and children who are undermined and demoralised in the process. I'm sure Highcrest can and will take lessons from the report, but the fact is they have made huge progress over recent years and will always face steep challenges while they operate in a wholly selective system.[/p][/quote]'Sadly the inspection process seems to be increasingly politicised and random.' In what way 'BekcsH'?[/p][/quote]Good question. More and more, Ofsted seems to be an instrument of government to push political agendas when, in my view, it should be wholly independent from politicians. For instance, it has become a tool in forced academisations and has been used to drive Gove's agendas around teacher's pay and teacher training. It is difficult for schools to take Ofsted's judgements seriously when they feel the inspectors are dancing to the tunes of politicians who often don't have the first idea about what it takes to deliver an effective education in tough circumstances. My understanding is that most recently Ofsted's new guidance says that schools achieving beneath the national average in attainment must receive 'requires improvement'. That is ludicrous. It takes no account of the wide range of factors outside the school's control that will affect attainment - social background, language, prior attainment and (in selective areas) having an intake that does not in any way reflect the full ability range. It is also ludicrous because by measuring schools against a national average, the whole system could be improving but the same proportion of schools will receive 'requires improvement'. Gove was taken to task over his apparent inability to understand this statistical fact by the Education Select Committee. So while our local grammar schools can mask poor teaching and receive 'good' or 'outstanding' based on the mere fact they have creamed off the top 30%, local secondary schools that add significant value and are often achieving incredible results when you look at the starting points of the children, are told they require improvement. We need our best teachers to be in our most difficult schools - but why will they go there if they know that how ever good a job they do they will be judged to 'require improvement'? I really hope that people locally who have seen the journey of Highcrest over the past 10 years, will therfore be wise enough not to use this Ofsted report as a stick with which to beat the school.[/p][/quote]Thanks. My beef with Highcrest is that it is part of a discredited (in my view and that of many others) system that creams off the top 30% and hothouses them and gives the remaining 70% the least it can manage to give. The BFP has written about Highcrest as if it were remedying this injustice by reform from within and the schemes announced by Highcrest don't make sense - how can you undermine grammar schools by further fragmenting by selection those who have failed the 11+? Undercover Euro Yob

7:51pm Wed 18 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

firminafirm wrote:
Marmite XO wrote:
As long as the Grammar Schools are doing well, what is the problem? By the time the failures go to schools like Highcrest, they are already lost causes. As long as they get enough support to steer them away from a life of crime, the school has done its job.
What a knob or is he/she being ironic ?
I can only think it's ironic - he's giving the view of grammar school supporters when they think no one unsound is listening - earlier this year 'smuggles' put it in a more genteel sounding way:

Why select kids at all? - Because (much like streaming into sets in subjects) it allows children to learn in the environment that will engage them the most. Grammar school is hard work in a disciplined environment, whether you or other like it or not, it would not suit all children.


I hope Marmite is just a master of poker-faced delivery.
[quote][p][bold]firminafirm[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marmite XO[/bold] wrote: As long as the Grammar Schools are doing well, what is the problem? By the time the failures go to schools like Highcrest, they are already lost causes. As long as they get enough support to steer them away from a life of crime, the school has done its job.[/p][/quote]What a knob or is he/she being ironic ?[/p][/quote]I can only think it's ironic - he's giving the view of grammar school supporters when they think no one unsound is listening - earlier this year 'smuggles' put it in a more genteel sounding way: [italic] Why select kids at all? - Because (much like streaming into sets in subjects) it allows children to learn in the environment that will engage them the most. Grammar school is hard work in a disciplined environment, whether you or other like it or not, it would not suit all children. [/italic] I [italic] hope [/italic]Marmite is just a master of poker-faced delivery. Undercover Euro Yob

9:26pm Wed 18 Dec 13

sorriso says...

Marmite XO wrote:
As long as the Grammar Schools are doing well, what is the problem? By the time the failures go to schools like Highcrest, they are already lost causes. As long as they get enough support to steer them away from a life of crime, the school has done its job.
I left Highcrest two years ago, I passed the 11+ with flying colours. However, after visiting grammar schools such as Wycombe High, it was clear they would be of little help when I may need the extra support. I'm quite unwell you see, I suffer from a genetic condition that requires monthly hospital admissions. If it wasn't for the help of the tremendous support team I doubt I would have been so successful in my GCSE's, so please keep your ignorant comments to yourself.
[quote][p][bold]Marmite XO[/bold] wrote: As long as the Grammar Schools are doing well, what is the problem? By the time the failures go to schools like Highcrest, they are already lost causes. As long as they get enough support to steer them away from a life of crime, the school has done its job.[/p][/quote]I left Highcrest two years ago, I passed the 11+ with flying colours. However, after visiting grammar schools such as Wycombe High, it was clear they would be of little help when I may need the extra support. I'm quite unwell you see, I suffer from a genetic condition that requires monthly hospital admissions. If it wasn't for the help of the tremendous support team I doubt I would have been so successful in my GCSE's, so please keep your ignorant comments to yourself. sorriso

9:31pm Wed 18 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

Sorriso

I doubt Marmite meant his remarks seriously.
Sorriso I doubt Marmite meant his remarks seriously. Undercover Euro Yob

10:02pm Wed 18 Dec 13

Littleskyfall says...

From what I have heard and from what I have read on here the problems lay with the Governors, Head and the senior staff. Teachers and support staff do their very best they can with little thanks and help. I feel so sorry for the poor 6th formers who have commented on here. Lets hope they will continue their studies elsewhere.
From what I have heard and from what I have read on here the problems lay with the Governors, Head and the senior staff. Teachers and support staff do their very best they can with little thanks and help. I feel so sorry for the poor 6th formers who have commented on here. Lets hope they will continue their studies elsewhere. Littleskyfall

10:55pm Wed 18 Dec 13

tottmick says...

itstheprincipal wrote:
This indeed is a case of the chickens coming home to roost! For Mr. Turner, Chair of Governors to state “We do not believe Highcrest has declined in the last three years....” then you realise just how much of a problem Highcrest has. The words “ostrich” “head” & “sand” spring to mind! “Inspectors said governors....... ‘do not have a clear enough view of the school’s performance which limits their ability to ask challenging questions”. Or in other words, the Governors have no idea what is going on at the school! Since becoming an academy Highcrest has been slammed into reverse, the exam results both in GCSE & A levels were some of the worst ever, in fact the results have gone backwards by 7 years, but that’s OK because Mr. Turner “does not believe Highcrest has declined...”!!! Sixth Form is an embarrassment at Highcrest, visit all the other schools Sixth Forms then visit Highcrest & you will see that it is none existent. It has NO facilities, has very few options to choose from, & has absolutely awful results, but that’s OK because Mr. Turner “does not believe Highcrest has declined...”!!! Official results will be released by the Government later this month showing ‘actual’ results of GCSEs 2013 (not just the ones Highcrest like you to see), this will show that Highcrest is now not only the lowest achieving school in Wycombe, but also in Bucks. Wycombe-buddy states “every event they always mentioned their outstanding.. even on their website.. they have now removed the ofsted reports section on their website haha...” Quite ironic isn’t it, Miss Moynihan doesn’t seem to want anyone to see it...I wonder why? Moynihan needs to stop blaming everyone else, “it’s not the right area, it’s too close to the grammar school, everyone’s against us” all spoken in a whiny voice!! She needs to get on with the job WE pay her to do, & that is teach (Oh! hold on a minute she doesn’t actually teach any classes does she!), just get on with getting the very best out of the students you have rather than giving up on them in favour of students from literally miles away. If you really want an insight into Highcrests ethos go to their website & search “self evaluation executive summary” where basically the management rate themselves....& lo & behold they rate the school ‘outstanding’ in EVERYTHING!!! Miss Moynihan YOU’VE BEEN CAUGHT OUT!!! You're not outstanding & I'm not sure you ever were, welcome to the real world
Time this gruesome twosome were outed, biggest chips on shoulders in Hatters Lane. Don't recognise outstanding public servants right under their noses. Forget chips more like Mr Spuds. Who will out them first?
[quote][p][bold]itstheprincipal[/bold] wrote: This indeed is a case of the chickens coming home to roost! For Mr. Turner, Chair of Governors to state “We do not believe Highcrest has declined in the last three years....” then you realise just how much of a problem Highcrest has. The words “ostrich” “head” & “sand” spring to mind! “Inspectors said governors....... ‘do not have a clear enough view of the school’s performance which limits their ability to ask challenging questions”. Or in other words, the Governors have no idea what is going on at the school! Since becoming an academy Highcrest has been slammed into reverse, the exam results both in GCSE & A levels were some of the worst ever, in fact the results have gone backwards by 7 years, but that’s OK because Mr. Turner “does not believe Highcrest has declined...”!!! Sixth Form is an embarrassment at Highcrest, visit all the other schools Sixth Forms then visit Highcrest & you will see that it is none existent. It has NO facilities, has very few options to choose from, & has absolutely awful results, but that’s OK because Mr. Turner “does not believe Highcrest has declined...”!!! Official results will be released by the Government later this month showing ‘actual’ results of GCSEs 2013 (not just the ones Highcrest like you to see), this will show that Highcrest is now not only the lowest achieving school in Wycombe, but also in Bucks. Wycombe-buddy states “every event they always mentioned their outstanding.. even on their website.. they have now removed the ofsted reports section on their website haha...” Quite ironic isn’t it, Miss Moynihan doesn’t seem to want anyone to see it...I wonder why? Moynihan needs to stop blaming everyone else, “it’s not the right area, it’s too close to the grammar school, everyone’s against us” all spoken in a whiny voice!! She needs to get on with the job WE pay her to do, & that is teach (Oh! hold on a minute she doesn’t actually teach any classes does she!), just get on with getting the very best out of the students you have rather than giving up on them in favour of students from literally miles away. If you really want an insight into Highcrests ethos go to their website & search “self evaluation executive summary” where basically the management rate themselves....& lo & behold they rate the school ‘outstanding’ in EVERYTHING!!! Miss Moynihan YOU’VE BEEN CAUGHT OUT!!! You're not outstanding & I'm not sure you ever were, welcome to the real world[/p][/quote]Time this gruesome twosome were outed, biggest chips on shoulders in Hatters Lane. Don't recognise outstanding public servants right under their noses. Forget chips more like Mr Spuds. Who will out them first? tottmick

10:58pm Wed 18 Dec 13

tottmick says...

itstheprincipal wrote:
Miss Moynihan stated last year that Highcrest was now the No.1 choice for parents in High Wycombe & that pupils were choosing Highcrest instead of the RGS. If that were at all true, which I severely doubt, it most certainly will not be now. As a community school it worked well, as an academy it has, I’m sad to say, become a bit of a laughing stock. It has lost all common ground with pupils, parents, staff & even the community itself. The banding tests & all ability nonsense makes things worse. Chair of Governors stated “Highcrest – which was ranked “outstanding” in its final inspection as a secondary school in 2010 before it converted to an academy last year – believes the judgement is “unfair”. I think that quantifies what I was saying, as a community school ‘outstanding’, as an academy ‘satisfactory’. But let’s not worry too much, as Mr. Turner says “this judgement is unfair” & he is obviously a qualified Ofsted inspector & knows exactly what is going on at the school, Oh! No wait a minute Ofsted caught the Governors out when they realised that for themselves, that the Governors don’t know what is going on!!! “The Ofsted Outstanding badge is only given to schools which achieve the Oustanding status and can only be used by these schools.” Presumably Highcrest will now be taking down all signage, removing all forms & headed paper with this logo on tout suite. They could always replace them with signs saying ‘satisfactory’, or would that explode the myth?
Gorblimey this is an obsession, who would actually take the signs down I wonder?
[quote][p][bold]itstheprincipal[/bold] wrote: Miss Moynihan stated last year that Highcrest was now the No.1 choice for parents in High Wycombe & that pupils were choosing Highcrest instead of the RGS. If that were at all true, which I severely doubt, it most certainly will not be now. As a community school it worked well, as an academy it has, I’m sad to say, become a bit of a laughing stock. It has lost all common ground with pupils, parents, staff & even the community itself. The banding tests & all ability nonsense makes things worse. Chair of Governors stated “Highcrest – which was ranked “outstanding” in its final inspection as a secondary school in 2010 before it converted to an academy last year – believes the judgement is “unfair”. I think that quantifies what I was saying, as a community school ‘outstanding’, as an academy ‘satisfactory’. But let’s not worry too much, as Mr. Turner says “this judgement is unfair” & he is obviously a qualified Ofsted inspector & knows exactly what is going on at the school, Oh! No wait a minute Ofsted caught the Governors out when they realised that for themselves, that the Governors don’t know what is going on!!! “The Ofsted Outstanding badge is only given to schools which achieve the Oustanding status and can only be used by these schools.” Presumably Highcrest will now be taking down all signage, removing all forms & headed paper with this logo on tout suite. They could always replace them with signs saying ‘satisfactory’, or would that explode the myth?[/p][/quote]Gorblimey this is an obsession, who would actually take the signs down I wonder? tottmick

11:02pm Wed 18 Dec 13

tottmick says...

itstheprincipal wrote:
Wycombe123 my heart goes out to you, there can be no excuse whatsoever the way Highcrest have treated you, Miss Moynihan & her team should be ashamed. But this seems to be the norm with her now, children are not pupils to her, they are purely exam results. If your results don’t fit then she doesn’t waste time on the children that need help, oh no! that would be much too much like hard work, so she ‘invented’ the banding tests so that she can ‘buy’ in the results she yearns for. This is happening all too often now especially with the sixth form, no wonder it’s virtually none existent. At this rate there will be nobody left in sixth form when they are re-inspected by Ofsted. I bet they are begging this year’s year 11s to stay on. It is a sad state of affairs when the school are messing up pupil’s futures with no remorse at all, but this seems the condescending attitude they have to all the pupils & parents. My advice to you Wycombe123 is don’t give up, don’t write yourself off, try & get in at a different Sixth Form, one that cares & that actually invests time in your future. If you feel Highcrest owe you your education then contact Bucks County Council, Ofsted & also enquire at a solicitor you may find you have grounds to take action. Good Luck
Some relationship here, no doubt, perhaps grusome twosome and sprog, answers on a postcard please?
[quote][p][bold]itstheprincipal[/bold] wrote: Wycombe123 my heart goes out to you, there can be no excuse whatsoever the way Highcrest have treated you, Miss Moynihan & her team should be ashamed. But this seems to be the norm with her now, children are not pupils to her, they are purely exam results. If your results don’t fit then she doesn’t waste time on the children that need help, oh no! that would be much too much like hard work, so she ‘invented’ the banding tests so that she can ‘buy’ in the results she yearns for. This is happening all too often now especially with the sixth form, no wonder it’s virtually none existent. At this rate there will be nobody left in sixth form when they are re-inspected by Ofsted. I bet they are begging this year’s year 11s to stay on. It is a sad state of affairs when the school are messing up pupil’s futures with no remorse at all, but this seems the condescending attitude they have to all the pupils & parents. My advice to you Wycombe123 is don’t give up, don’t write yourself off, try & get in at a different Sixth Form, one that cares & that actually invests time in your future. If you feel Highcrest owe you your education then contact Bucks County Council, Ofsted & also enquire at a solicitor you may find you have grounds to take action. Good Luck[/p][/quote]Some relationship here, no doubt, perhaps grusome twosome and sprog, answers on a postcard please? tottmick

10:31am Thu 19 Dec 13

wycombe user says...

with so many parents beginning to take action , highcrest may accept the students back
with so many parents beginning to take action , highcrest may accept the students back wycombe user

11:03am Thu 19 Dec 13

Bajina says...

Hi wycombe user or any other blogger, you say ''with so many parents beginning to take action , ''

Are you aware of any of these parents? If yes, we have been approached by some, that would like to join them.
They have come to us for advise, but quite frankly, we are only amateur interested community volunteers.
Any available help will be appreciated.
Hi wycombe user or any other blogger, you say ''with so many parents beginning to take action , '' Are you aware of any of these parents? If yes, we have been approached by some, that would like to join them. They have come to us for advise, but quite frankly, we are only amateur interested community volunteers. Any available help will be appreciated. Bajina

11:34am Thu 19 Dec 13

wycombe user says...

Bajina wrote:
Hi wycombe user or any other blogger, you say ''with so many parents beginning to take action , ''

Are you aware of any of these parents? If yes, we have been approached by some, that would like to join them.
They have come to us for advise, but quite frankly, we are only amateur interested community volunteers.
Any available help will be appreciated.
hi Bajina , yes i am aware of the parents who are willing to take action, you are very welcome to join us, in fact the more parents the better. could i have your email address where i can contact you on?
[quote][p][bold]Bajina[/bold] wrote: Hi wycombe user or any other blogger, you say ''with so many parents beginning to take action , '' Are you aware of any of these parents? If yes, we have been approached by some, that would like to join them. They have come to us for advise, but quite frankly, we are only amateur interested community volunteers. Any available help will be appreciated.[/p][/quote]hi Bajina , yes i am aware of the parents who are willing to take action, you are very welcome to join us, in fact the more parents the better. could i have your email address where i can contact you on? wycombe user

2:00pm Thu 19 Dec 13

Bajina says...

wycombe user, pl contact me ASAP through:
http://www.ccmr-wyco
mbe.co.uk/contact.ht
ml
I administrator for this site.
wycombe user, pl contact me ASAP through: http://www.ccmr-wyco mbe.co.uk/contact.ht ml I administrator for this site. Bajina

10:02pm Thu 19 Dec 13

wycombe012 says...

I had to comment after seeing so many negative comments about the school...right I have been living in the location of the school for over 15 years.. I remember hatters lane school being closed down as it was a really poor performing school .. then highcrest opened and believe me it has improved year on year.. it is a good school.. it is performing much better than ramsay and holmer green (you can check the gcse result reports).. I do disagree with their admissions and banding tests though.. I know ofsted pulled out the problems with sixth form department.. which meant the school had to take action and removed students with poor attendance, poor behaviour and overall underperformers...so all of you complaining need to jog on and stop downgrading the school as any school would take action to improve their standards by removing rotten apples from the tree. Its funny seeing students writing longer essays here downgrading the school than in their assignments!
I had to comment after seeing so many negative comments about the school...right I have been living in the location of the school for over 15 years.. I remember hatters lane school being closed down as it was a really poor performing school .. then highcrest opened and believe me it has improved year on year.. it is a good school.. it is performing much better than ramsay and holmer green (you can check the gcse result reports).. I do disagree with their admissions and banding tests though.. I know ofsted pulled out the problems with sixth form department.. which meant the school had to take action and removed students with poor attendance, poor behaviour and overall underperformers...so all of you complaining need to jog on and stop downgrading the school as any school would take action to improve their standards by removing rotten apples from the tree. Its funny seeing students writing longer essays here downgrading the school than in their assignments! wycombe012

11:16pm Thu 19 Dec 13

tottmick says...

Bajina wrote:
wycombe user, pl contact me ASAP through: http://www.ccmr-wyco mbe.co.uk/contact.ht ml I administrator for this site.
Bajina reputation into the cess-pit, too feeble to tackle the grammars, group was to be convened for parents happy with Highcrest - no venue big enough -I hear.
[quote][p][bold]Bajina[/bold] wrote: wycombe user, pl contact me ASAP through: http://www.ccmr-wyco mbe.co.uk/contact.ht ml I administrator for this site.[/p][/quote]Bajina reputation into the cess-pit, too feeble to tackle the grammars, group was to be convened for parents happy with Highcrest - no venue big enough -I hear. tottmick

12:01am Fri 20 Dec 13

itstheprincipal says...

Ha-ha never been called gruesome before I’ll have to let Mr. Spud know.
To all the Sixth Formers carry on the good work & good luck
To Wycombe012 who says “ .. it is a good school.. it is performing much better than ramsay and holmer green (you can check the gcse result reports)...” I’m not sure which league tables you are looking at but in tables for 2012 Ramsey & Holmer Green were both above Highcrest. 2013 tables aren't out yet.
Ha-ha never been called gruesome before I’ll have to let Mr. Spud know. To all the Sixth Formers carry on the good work & good luck To Wycombe012 who says “ .. it is a good school.. it is performing much better than ramsay and holmer green (you can check the gcse result reports)...” I’m not sure which league tables you are looking at but in tables for 2012 Ramsey & Holmer Green were both above Highcrest. 2013 tables aren't out yet. itstheprincipal

1:48pm Fri 20 Dec 13

wycombe012 says...

***** I am just hearing that highcrest have accepted the students back again... I personally think they should have stood their ground, these students were making the school sound ''RUBBISH'' yet begged a place back at the ''RUBBISH'' school, which does not make sense. I have checked highcrests' website and ALL SIXTHFORMERS were made to sign a contract which CLEARLY states the rules (so I don't know why the students were ''confused''), they should pay more attention when signing up. I will paste the hand out contract form below, I personally think the school did the right thing by removing them, it clearly says in the contract that students will be removed if they under perform...

Sixth Form Understanding Contract
I understand that:
1. There is a 4 week rule in place whereby if I am not putting the effort into every subject; or if my teachers’ think I am on an inappropriate course, then I will be either asked to leave The Highcrest Academy or my options will be discussed with me and my parents will be informed.
2. There are several ‘reporting points’ throughout the course of the year, that if I am not satisfying my teachers with effort and achievement I will be asked to leave The Highcrest Academy.
3. And will comply with the school uniform requirement of a suit at all times.
4. I will not have paid work outside of school that adds up to more than 10 hours per week at any point during my Sixth Form career at The Highcrest Academy.
5. By attending The Highcrest Academy I have enrolled in a full-time (08:35-15:25) course Monday to Friday.
6. I must be in school and attend lessons every day (except for school organised events). Any appointments must be made outside of school time and where this is not possible permission must be sought from the Head of Sixth Form prior to the day of the appointment.
7. “Study lessons” are to be completed as Independent work, using the member of staff in the room as support where possible, and are never an excuse not to work or be playing games.
8. I can bring my own laptop/ tablet into school but that it cannot (at present) be networked so internet usage must be through another means e.g. a dongle. The computer / tablet remains my property and therefore my responsibility and the school will take no responsibility for loss or damage.
9. Set independent study work / coursework / homework etc. must be completed with no excuses and no exception.
10. To move into Year 13 I must achieve no lower than D grades in my AS exams (3 subjects must be taken at A2 level or the equivalent in Year 13).
11. As a Sixth Former I am an Ambassador for the school even if I do not apply to be a Prefect.
***** I am just hearing that highcrest have accepted the students back again... I personally think they should have stood their ground, these students were making the school sound ''RUBBISH'' yet begged a place back at the ''RUBBISH'' school, which does not make sense. I have checked highcrests' website and ALL SIXTHFORMERS were made to sign a contract which CLEARLY states the rules (so I don't know why the students were ''confused''), they should pay more attention when signing up. I will paste the hand out contract form below, I personally think the school did the right thing by removing them, it clearly says in the contract that students will be removed if they under perform... Sixth Form Understanding Contract I understand that: 1. There is a 4 week rule in place whereby if I am not putting the effort into every subject; or if my teachers’ think I am on an inappropriate course, then I will be either asked to leave The Highcrest Academy or my options will be discussed with me and my parents will be informed. 2. There are several ‘reporting points’ throughout the course of the year, that if I am not satisfying my teachers with effort and achievement I will be asked to leave The Highcrest Academy. 3. And will comply with the school uniform requirement of a suit at all times. 4. I will not have paid work outside of school that adds up to more than 10 hours per week at any point during my Sixth Form career at The Highcrest Academy. 5. By attending The Highcrest Academy I have enrolled in a full-time (08:35-15:25) course Monday to Friday. 6. I must be in school and attend lessons every day (except for school organised events). Any appointments must be made outside of school time and where this is not possible permission must be sought from the Head of Sixth Form prior to the day of the appointment. 7. “Study lessons” are to be completed as Independent work, using the member of staff in the room as support where possible, and are never an excuse not to work or be playing games. 8. I can bring my own laptop/ tablet into school but that it cannot (at present) be networked so internet usage must be through another means e.g. a dongle. The computer / tablet remains my property and therefore my responsibility and the school will take no responsibility for loss or damage. 9. Set independent study work / coursework / homework etc. must be completed with no excuses and no exception. 10. To move into Year 13 I must achieve no lower than D grades in my AS exams (3 subjects must be taken at A2 level or the equivalent in Year 13). 11. As a Sixth Former I am an Ambassador for the school even if I do not apply to be a Prefect. wycombe012

4:33pm Fri 20 Dec 13

wycombe user says...

wycombe012 wrote:
I had to comment after seeing so many negative comments about the school...right I have been living in the location of the school for over 15 years.. I remember hatters lane school being closed down as it was a really poor performing school .. then highcrest opened and believe me it has improved year on year.. it is a good school.. it is performing much better than ramsay and holmer green (you can check the gcse result reports).. I do disagree with their admissions and banding tests though.. I know ofsted pulled out the problems with sixth form department.. which meant the school had to take action and removed students with poor attendance, poor behaviour and overall underperformers...so all of you complaining need to jog on and stop downgrading the school as any school would take action to improve their standards by removing rotten apples from the tree. Its funny seeing students writing longer essays here downgrading the school than in their assignments!
wycombe012 you seriously need to put your act together if you do not respect us students then seriously you need to get off this article
[quote][p][bold]wycombe012[/bold] wrote: I had to comment after seeing so many negative comments about the school...right I have been living in the location of the school for over 15 years.. I remember hatters lane school being closed down as it was a really poor performing school .. then highcrest opened and believe me it has improved year on year.. it is a good school.. it is performing much better than ramsay and holmer green (you can check the gcse result reports).. I do disagree with their admissions and banding tests though.. I know ofsted pulled out the problems with sixth form department.. which meant the school had to take action and removed students with poor attendance, poor behaviour and overall underperformers...so all of you complaining need to jog on and stop downgrading the school as any school would take action to improve their standards by removing rotten apples from the tree. Its funny seeing students writing longer essays here downgrading the school than in their assignments![/p][/quote]wycombe012 you seriously need to put your act together if you do not respect us students then seriously you need to get off this article wycombe user

5:16pm Fri 20 Dec 13

Bajina says...

wycombe012 wrote:
I had to comment after seeing so many negative comments about the school...right I have been living in the location of the school for over 15 years.. I remember hatters lane school being closed down as it was a really poor performing school .. then highcrest opened and believe me it has improved year on year.. it is a good school.. it is performing much better than ramsay and holmer green (you can check the gcse result reports).. I do disagree with their admissions and banding tests though.. I know ofsted pulled out the problems with sixth form department.. which meant the school had to take action and removed students with poor attendance, poor behaviour and overall underperformers...so all of you complaining need to jog on and stop downgrading the school as any school would take action to improve their standards by removing rotten apples from the tree. Its funny seeing students writing longer essays here downgrading the school than in their assignments!
Hi wycombe012,
Good to see Highcrest supported.
May i please ask, where did you read about gcse results of Highcrest being better than other 2 schools you mention?
i genuinely am interested in standards applied to ALL children, by ALL our Wycombe Schools. The information i have read is in line with 'itstheprinciple's belief.
HOWEVER, trust me on this, if the 'other schools' have published (in the BFP) less than scrupulously accurate results, I will personally haul them before Oversight & Scrutiny. And you can help me, if you like.
[quote][p][bold]wycombe012[/bold] wrote: I had to comment after seeing so many negative comments about the school...right I have been living in the location of the school for over 15 years.. I remember hatters lane school being closed down as it was a really poor performing school .. then highcrest opened and believe me it has improved year on year.. it is a good school.. it is performing much better than ramsay and holmer green (you can check the gcse result reports).. I do disagree with their admissions and banding tests though.. I know ofsted pulled out the problems with sixth form department.. which meant the school had to take action and removed students with poor attendance, poor behaviour and overall underperformers...so all of you complaining need to jog on and stop downgrading the school as any school would take action to improve their standards by removing rotten apples from the tree. Its funny seeing students writing longer essays here downgrading the school than in their assignments![/p][/quote]Hi wycombe012, Good to see Highcrest supported. May i please ask, where did you read about gcse results of Highcrest being better than other 2 schools you mention? i genuinely am interested in standards applied to ALL children, by ALL our Wycombe Schools. The information i have read is in line with 'itstheprinciple's belief. HOWEVER, trust me on this, if the 'other schools' have published (in the BFP) less than scrupulously accurate results, I will personally haul them before Oversight & Scrutiny. And you can help me, if you like. Bajina

5:40pm Fri 20 Dec 13

Bajina says...

tottmick wrote:
itstheprincipal wrote:
Wycombe123 my heart goes out to you, there can be no excuse whatsoever the way Highcrest have treated you, Miss Moynihan & her team should be ashamed. But this seems to be the norm with her now, children are not pupils to her, they are purely exam results. If your results don’t fit then she doesn’t waste time on the children that need help, oh no! that would be much too much like hard work, so she ‘invented’ the banding tests so that she can ‘buy’ in the results she yearns for. This is happening all too often now especially with the sixth form, no wonder it’s virtually none existent. At this rate there will be nobody left in sixth form when they are re-inspected by Ofsted. I bet they are begging this year’s year 11s to stay on. It is a sad state of affairs when the school are messing up pupil’s futures with no remorse at all, but this seems the condescending attitude they have to all the pupils & parents. My advice to you Wycombe123 is don’t give up, don’t write yourself off, try & get in at a different Sixth Form, one that cares & that actually invests time in your future. If you feel Highcrest owe you your education then contact Bucks County Council, Ofsted & also enquire at a solicitor you may find you have grounds to take action. Good Luck
Some relationship here, no doubt, perhaps grusome twosome and sprog, answers on a postcard please?
Tottmick, are you related to (e wycombe)mick? Does not matter.

Good to see support for Highcrest.
You do understand, some of the above & I do not hate your school. Far from. We genuinely admire how much david then Shena at your school has done for pupil. You get perhaps the second or third most challenging cohort in Wycombe. Your school had accepted the challenge, steadfastly applied hard work, good teaching and dedication. Highcrest did a fantastic job with this cohort. The previous outstanding did not just happen! It was deserved.
Granted, the rest of us (School Governors, Parents, BCC and the LA) of us could have done more. Articulated praise, supported, monitored, been better critical friends, and applauded your work more. We failed, pure and simple.
Not surprised to see a reaction from the school, but Banding and 'kicking kids out'.........a bit too much mate, just a touch too much.
Make you a deal: abolish Banding, take all the kids back without silly hurdles, and i will become your biggest supporter - certainly big enough to make you blush!
[quote][p][bold]tottmick[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]itstheprincipal[/bold] wrote: Wycombe123 my heart goes out to you, there can be no excuse whatsoever the way Highcrest have treated you, Miss Moynihan & her team should be ashamed. But this seems to be the norm with her now, children are not pupils to her, they are purely exam results. If your results don’t fit then she doesn’t waste time on the children that need help, oh no! that would be much too much like hard work, so she ‘invented’ the banding tests so that she can ‘buy’ in the results she yearns for. This is happening all too often now especially with the sixth form, no wonder it’s virtually none existent. At this rate there will be nobody left in sixth form when they are re-inspected by Ofsted. I bet they are begging this year’s year 11s to stay on. It is a sad state of affairs when the school are messing up pupil’s futures with no remorse at all, but this seems the condescending attitude they have to all the pupils & parents. My advice to you Wycombe123 is don’t give up, don’t write yourself off, try & get in at a different Sixth Form, one that cares & that actually invests time in your future. If you feel Highcrest owe you your education then contact Bucks County Council, Ofsted & also enquire at a solicitor you may find you have grounds to take action. Good Luck[/p][/quote]Some relationship here, no doubt, perhaps grusome twosome and sprog, answers on a postcard please?[/p][/quote]Tottmick, are you related to (e wycombe)mick? Does not matter. Good to see support for Highcrest. You do understand, some of the above & I do not hate your school. Far from. We genuinely admire how much david then Shena at your school has done for pupil. You get perhaps the second or third most challenging cohort in Wycombe. Your school had accepted the challenge, steadfastly applied hard work, good teaching and dedication. Highcrest did a fantastic job with this cohort. The previous outstanding did not just happen! It was deserved. Granted, the rest of us (School Governors, Parents, BCC and the LA) of us could have done more. Articulated praise, supported, monitored, been better critical friends, and applauded your work more. We failed, pure and simple. Not surprised to see a reaction from the school, but Banding and 'kicking kids out'.........a bit too much mate, just a touch too much. Make you a deal: abolish Banding, take all the kids back without silly hurdles, and i will become your biggest supporter - certainly big enough to make you blush! Bajina

9:14pm Fri 20 Dec 13

Littleskyfall says...

I agree with you Bajina, there are a lot of people who have supported the school during it's Community school days and seen it grow and develop, but what they have done since becoming an Academy has lost a lot of their supporters. Whether people are relatives/staff or pupils it does not matter, what matters is they must put things right - abandon the banding, and take in the local children, take back 6th the formers and give them the support they need and deserve, and quite possibly change the Head/senior staff and Governors? Start 2014 with a clean slate.
I agree with you Bajina, there are a lot of people who have supported the school during it's Community school days and seen it grow and develop, but what they have done since becoming an Academy has lost a lot of their supporters. Whether people are relatives/staff or pupils it does not matter, what matters is they must put things right - abandon the banding, and take in the local children, take back 6th the formers and give them the support they need and deserve, and quite possibly change the Head/senior staff and Governors? Start 2014 with a clean slate. Littleskyfall

10:57pm Fri 20 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

tottmick wrote:
Bajina wrote:
wycombe user, pl contact me ASAP through: http://www.ccmr-wyco mbe.co.uk/contact.ht ml I administrator for this site.
Bajina reputation into the cess-pit, too feeble to tackle the grammars, group was to be convened for parents happy with Highcrest - no venue big enough -I hear.
Que?
[quote][p][bold]tottmick[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bajina[/bold] wrote: wycombe user, pl contact me ASAP through: http://www.ccmr-wyco mbe.co.uk/contact.ht ml I administrator for this site.[/p][/quote]Bajina reputation into the cess-pit, too feeble to tackle the grammars, group was to be convened for parents happy with Highcrest - no venue big enough -I hear.[/p][/quote]Que? Undercover Euro Yob

12:56am Sun 22 Dec 13

tottmick says...

itstheprincipal wrote:
Ha-ha never been called gruesome before I’ll have to let Mr. Spud know. To all the Sixth Formers carry on the good work & good luck To Wycombe012 who says “ .. it is a good school.. it is performing much better than ramsay and holmer green (you can check the gcse result reports)...” I’m not sure which league tables you are looking at but in tables for 2012 Ramsey & Holmer Green were both above Highcrest. 2013 tables aren't out yet.
Mrs Gruesome and Mr Spud then if you like, well known for downright unpleasantness and living near too near the school. You have sure changed your tune now you are 'outed'. What a vaudeville act you are.
[quote][p][bold]itstheprincipal[/bold] wrote: Ha-ha never been called gruesome before I’ll have to let Mr. Spud know. To all the Sixth Formers carry on the good work & good luck To Wycombe012 who says “ .. it is a good school.. it is performing much better than ramsay and holmer green (you can check the gcse result reports)...” I’m not sure which league tables you are looking at but in tables for 2012 Ramsey & Holmer Green were both above Highcrest. 2013 tables aren't out yet.[/p][/quote]Mrs Gruesome and Mr Spud then if you like, well known for downright unpleasantness and living near too near the school. You have sure changed your tune now you are 'outed'. What a vaudeville act you are. tottmick

1:53pm Wed 8 Jan 14

informedlocal says...

Don’t forget you are writing about one of our local schools. If you actively support our local secondary schools in Wycombe then give yourself a pat on the back. If you are not supportive of our schools and don’t want to get involved at all then that is your choice and it is OK. If however you do nothing to help any of our schools but just sit blogging rude, negative and frequently inaccurate information about schools and their staff that makes you one of those disgusting cyber-trolls. What you could do if you are genuinely interested in helping local educational establishments improve is to apply to fill one of the 16000 vacant governor posts that were reported on in the press earlier this week. Think of it as a new year’s resolution to do something better with your life that you can be proud of and turn over a new leaf.
Don’t forget you are writing about one of our local schools. If you actively support our local secondary schools in Wycombe then give yourself a pat on the back. If you are not supportive of our schools and don’t want to get involved at all then that is your choice and it is OK. If however you do nothing to help any of our schools but just sit blogging rude, negative and frequently inaccurate information about schools and their staff that makes you one of those disgusting cyber-trolls. What you could do if you are genuinely interested in helping local educational establishments improve is to apply to fill one of the 16000 vacant governor posts that were reported on in the press earlier this week. Think of it as a new year’s resolution to do something better with your life that you can be proud of and turn over a new leaf. informedlocal

6:47pm Wed 8 Jan 14

Bajina says...

informedlocal wrote:
Don’t forget you are writing about one of our local schools. If you actively support our local secondary schools in Wycombe then give yourself a pat on the back. If you are not supportive of our schools and don’t want to get involved at all then that is your choice and it is OK. If however you do nothing to help any of our schools but just sit blogging rude, negative and frequently inaccurate information about schools and their staff that makes you one of those disgusting cyber-trolls. What you could do if you are genuinely interested in helping local educational establishments improve is to apply to fill one of the 16000 vacant governor posts that were reported on in the press earlier this week. Think of it as a new year’s resolution to do something better with your life that you can be proud of and turn over a new leaf.
Infomediocal, Good point, well made.

Any one want to apply for a Governorship at a Secondary or Primary or Children's Centre?
I will supply this and a pint at your local hotelierie!
[quote][p][bold]informedlocal[/bold] wrote: Don’t forget you are writing about one of our local schools. If you actively support our local secondary schools in Wycombe then give yourself a pat on the back. If you are not supportive of our schools and don’t want to get involved at all then that is your choice and it is OK. If however you do nothing to help any of our schools but just sit blogging rude, negative and frequently inaccurate information about schools and their staff that makes you one of those disgusting cyber-trolls. What you could do if you are genuinely interested in helping local educational establishments improve is to apply to fill one of the 16000 vacant governor posts that were reported on in the press earlier this week. Think of it as a new year’s resolution to do something better with your life that you can be proud of and turn over a new leaf.[/p][/quote]Infomediocal, Good point, well made. Any one want to apply for a Governorship at a Secondary or Primary or Children's Centre? I will supply this and a pint at your local hotelierie! Bajina

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

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