newmarket - Suffolk County Council

Transcription

APPENDIX 10 - NEWMARKET
1. In Newmarket, the level of satisfaction with the time for consultation and
information available was markedly less than elsewhere at 49% and 34%
respectively. The number of responses was however significantly higher
than in other areas. The need to address high levels of surplus capacity in
the town led to more radical proposals for the first schools than
elsewhere.
2. The only first school where there was a high level of support for the
preferred option was at Ditton Lodge, where it will be for Cambridgeshire
to bring forward statutory proposals. The options for Tuddenham,
Moulton, All Saints and Laureate received a small majority of responses in
their favour, although there were common concerns over facilities for Y5
and Y6 and possible disruption during building work.
3. At Exning, the main additional concern was the possible reduction in the
admission limit from 27 to 15. Most of this concern came from people
living outside the catchment area; the nine responses from within the area
were mainly in support of the option. Further study of the data held on
pre-school children confirms that 15 places will be enough to meet
demand from within the catchment area. An admission number of 20 was
considered however this would require either the relocation of an existing
community room or the provision of an additional classroom. Given the
current oversupply of school places in Newmarket and other
recommendations for schools in the area, providing an new classroom
would not be good use of public resources.
4. The preferred option of amalgamating Paddocks and Houldsworth Valley
school to offer pupils the benefit of a larger school, with a different set of
governance arrangements which would attract more capital investment,
received very little support from parents, staff and governors of Paddocks
school, although the governing body of Houldsworth Valley school did
support the proposal.
5.
Arguments against the amalgamation included a reduction in parental
preference, concerns over the size of the proposed new school, traffic
implications of more children accessing the Houldsworth Valley site, and
the practicalities of amalgamating the schools.
6.
It is important for cabinet to listen to genuine objections to proposals for
change, and to test these against the County Council's agreed principles
for school organisation as Cabinet did for Lowestoft and Haverhill. The
major factor against the amalgamation, tested by these principles, would
seem to be the siting of the proposed new school on the current
Houldsworth Valley site. Consequently, it is not recommended to go
ahead with the amalgamation at this stage, and that the alternative of
extending both schools to form separate one form entry (30 places per
year group) primary schools is agreed by cabinet. Schools of this size
and age range are consistent with the school organisation principles.
7.
However, the demographic and other issues which led to the suggestion
that these two schools should amalgamate remain. These will need to be
addressed outside of the School Organisation Review process, and the
governing bodies will be encouraged to work closely together to ensure
the quality of educational provision in both schools is developed, and that
they are sustainable in the long term, given current and projected need for
primary school places in Newmarket.
8. The Catholic first school, St. Louis, occupies a constrained site. Together
with the need to address the over supply of school places in Newmarket,
this led to the suggestion that with two more year groups on site, the
admission number should be limited to 30 places per year. During
consultation it has been argued that with only 30 places available each
year the school would not be able to meet demand from Catholic families.
It has also been argued that many of the pupils attending the school do not
come from Newmarket and if they did not attend St. Louis, they would not
take up surplus places at other schools in the town. The school have
commissioned a feasibility study to show how 315 places (45 in each year
group), can be provided on its site and how off-site playing fields can be
provided.
9. Given the arguments presented during consultation it is recommended that
the governors’ preferred size of school is supported.
10. The County Council’s preferred option of a two-tier school system means
that if a two-tier system is adopted in an area the consequence is that
middle schools would be closed. Consultation on the future of Scaltback
and St. Felix Middle Schools elicited strong feelings in support of retaining
the three-tier system.
11. Much of the support for the three-tier system was based on perceptions of
the middle schools as being good schools achieving high standards and
perception of Newmarket College as underachieving. This picture is not
entirely supported by the evidence which continues to confirm the findings
of the Policy Development Panel during Phase 1 of the Review. This
makes it unsustainable for Newmarket to be an exception to the Council’s
preferred option.
12. All three schools are recognised in their most recent full Ofsted reports as
“satisfactory”. While Scaltback is one of the middle schools where
achievement at Key Stage 2 is around national and local average, the
evidence shows this has not been the case at St. Felix. Published
Contextual Value Added data for 2006 and 2007 shows that pupils at
Scaltback make the expected progress from KS1 to KS2, while at St. Felix
progress has been less than could be expected based on pupils’
background and previous achievements.
13. Although one of the two middle schools in Newmarket is one of the higher
achieving middle schools, the continuing gap between performance in the
two and three-tier systems referred to in the main report does not justify
the retention of a three tier system.
14. The loss of sporting facilities, in particular for rugby, at Scaltback has been
another area of concern in consultation. Meetings have been held to
consider how access to these facilities can be maintained and have
identified options for further investigation.
15. Achievement at GCSE at Newmarket College has fallen in recent years
and is below county and national averages. The rate of progress from KS2
to KS4 has also fallen. This is recognised by the new head teacher who
has begun a programme of school improvement to address this decline.
The strengths of the two-tier system will support the changes being
implemented as will the possibility of close co-operation including
federation with the two middle schools during transition.
16. BSF will provide the opportunity to fundamentally review how the College
buildings will support teaching and learning. It is important that any
development of the site does not compromise future options. The use of
Scaltback Middle School buildings as an annex would enable the College
to accommodate the additional pupils if necessary without impinging on
future development.
17. In response to the findings of the LSC’s supply and demand study for post16 provision in Forest Heath, Newmarket College has begun to develop a
joint sixth form with Mildenhall College of Technology which will provide a
sixth form of the size consistent with the principles.
18. Following a recent meeting between officers, the head of Newmarket
College and the two middle school heads, a plan for an all-age strategy for
education in Newmarket is emerging. This includes consideration of how
federations between schools can manage the transition process.
Summary of Consultation Analysis – All Saints CEVAP School
Location
Vicarage Road,
Newmarket,
CB8 8JE
Vicarage Road,
Consultation
Newmarket,
Proposal
CB8 8JE
Vicarage Road,
Recommendation Newmarket,
CB8 8JE
Current
Age Range
Reception –
Year 4
(Age 4 – 9)
Reception –
Year 6
(Age 4 – 11)
Reception –
Year 6
(Age 4 – 11)
Maximum
number of
children
admitted in
each year
group
118
30
(Number on
Roll Jan 08)
30
(Number if
full)
30
(Number if
full)
210
210
Consultation Meeting
Staff
Consultation Meeting attendance
Governors
Public
21
38
Number
on roll or
if full
Total
59
The main concerns and issues raised at the meeting were:
The loss of specialist facilities and teaching for years 5 and 6.
-
That building work at the schools would be completed on time and could
be afforded.
Reassurance was sought that standards would be maintained during the
transition period.
Many people want to retain middle schools
Quantitative analysis
Questionnaire Responses
(from All Saints catchment respondents unless otherwise stated)
Q3 - Comment on proposal for All Saints School
Agreed
Disagreed
All respondents
68 (54%)
57 (46%)
All Saints catchment respondents
10 (63%)
6 (38%)
Q1 - How well do proposals meet the principles?
Well
Not Well
Single point of accountability
70%
30%
Minimise points of transfer
61%
39%
Safeguard village schools
58%
42%
Size of secondary schools
39%
61%
Have you had……
Yes
No
Q4 - Sufficient time to give your views
85%
15%
Q5 - Sufficient Information
61%
39%
Qualitative analysis
Formal Governing Body response – [NM153*] supported:
- The proposal to retain All Saints with the addition of years 5 and 6
- The purchase of additional land to enable the school to be expanded
- Keeping Houldsworth Valley and Paddocks as separate schools
Other responses relating to this school included:
- Headteacher All Saints CEVAP [NM131*]
- Church of England Diocesan Board of Education [FHG5*]
Relevant extracts of these responses are included in the analysis below.
Standards and School Improvement
There were concerns that children in years 5 and 6 will suffer without the facilities
currently available in middle schools:
 Sporting facilities -> Middle schools have excellent sporting facilities, how are
small primary schools going to provide these facilities? ie: Tennis courts,
sport/hall centre, athletics, hockey pitch etc, basketball - especially with the
Government's focus on obese children. 10 and 11 year olds will require
excellent sporting facilities. Science labs? Woodwork rooms? Art rooms?
How are the primary schools to compete with that? [NP105*]
 Middle schools have good facilities such as science labs – will that be brought
onto primary sites? Middle schools have excellent sports facilities – All Saints
can’t accommodate all this – What will happen to them? [Comments from
public consultation meeting*]
There was a high level of confidence in the abilities of the school to maintain good
standards:
 I have every confidence that the headteacher and staff will do a good job and
that this is a very good school. It is special - every child and talent is nurtured,
every problem resolved. [Comments from public consultation meeting*]
The importance of maintaining faith-based education was stressed:
 As the only Church of England school in the area it offers parents choice and
diversity. The school has close links with the parish of All Saints’ Church, in
which it is situated. It was set up to serve those in the local community, which it
continues to do to this day. [NM131*]
Need for Places
The need to maintain a school on this side of Newmarket was mentioned:
 It is the only Suffolk school in Newmarket situated on this side of the High
Street, which is a significant geographical dividing line. The nearest
neighbouring school is in Cambridgeshire [NM131*]
Impact on Community and Travel
Concerns were expressed regarding the lack of parking around the site and the
increase in traffic:
 Already lacks space + parking is an issue [NP166*]
 Parking – there is no pedestrian bit nearby. [Comments from public
consultation meeting*]
 All Saints Road is narrow and already very congested during school drop off
and pick up times. [NM1a*]
 The extra children here will cause the same problem. How will busses work
here? [Comments from public consultation meeting*]
 Vicarage Road is already very busy, with very little parking and obviously more
children and staff will further congest the area. We suggest: 20 mph speed
restrictions, a crossing or lollipop person, dropped kerbs at entrances. Access
will become even more problematical while building work is taking place: plant,
deliveries etc. [NM153*]
The role the school plays in the local community was highlighted:
 It is very well respected in the community of Newmarket and has a long
established tradition and reputation for offering a caring and supportive learning
environment for children of all abilities and for meeting individual needs. The
school was highly rated in the last Ofsted and SIAS inspections, a year ago.
The school offers extended services, including a pre-school on the site and a
before and after school childcare facility. [NM131*]
Types of Schools and School Characteristics
There were no comments specifically relating to Types of Schools and School
Characteristics
Specific Age Provision
There was support for the school to keep its nursery and for the children who will be
most affected by the transition:
 What is your commitment to keeping the nursery on site? [Comments from
staff/governor consultation meeting*]
 I have a daughter in year 3 and personally prefer the 2-tier system. I want it to
be as least disruptive as possible. How can we make the transition as smooth
as possible? [Comments from public consultation meeting*]
SEN Provision
There were no comments specifically relating to SEN Provision
School Category
There were no comments specifically relating to School Category
Funding and Land
There were concerns about the potential of the site to expand:
 As a member of staff at All Saints I find it incredulous that a feasibility study
could say there is space for buildings & 60 more pupils. The dinner hall does
not have the capacity for existing pupils, the playgrounds & fields are
overcrowded and insufficient. Even building on the redundant pool - these is no
room! I shall find a new job. [NP23*]
 I find it hard to believe that changes to the site will provide the space for extra
classrooms, a science lab, an art room, a hall large enough to accommodate all
the children for assemblies, and the parents for school plays, as well as a large
enough playground and sports area. These facilities are already provided by
the middle schools. Of course demolishing the swimming pool would create
some space, but this would take away rather than add to the curriculum, and
still would not provide the facilities, along with the specialist teaching in subject
areas she now enjoys [NM31*]
 What about the land? How can you put 60 more children on a finite site?
[Comments from public consultation meeting*]
 Expansion of the school on the current site will require careful and creative
planning, to best use the space available. The site is quite tight, although use
of the redundant swimming pool area offers some space for growth, which is
currently not used. The purchase of any additional land, from Forest Heath
District Council on two sides and/or from the Police on another would be of
significant benefit to provide more land to offer better facilities on expansion.
[NM131*]
 It is not just a matter of building two additional classrooms, but consideration
needs to be given to expansion of the hall, play areas, car parking, toilets etc.
to provide adequate facilities for pupils and staff. [NM131*]
 The acquisition of extra land is highly preferred as this would make the
expansion plans (2 new classrooms, extended hall, larger car park etc.) much
easier to achieve and be far more advantageous for the future of the pupils'
education. [NM153*]
 The Board supports the extension of the school by two year groups with the
current PAN of 30, and urges the Local Authority to make every effort to
purchase further land so that the site can be enlarged. [FHG5*]
And concerns about funding:
 Cost – will 100% of the cost of changes be bound to the school? What will the
school have to find? Who is taking what cost? Will we pay 10%? [Comments
from staff/governor consultation meeting*]
 Budget – have you still got guarantees from the government the money will be
available, or will the money be frozen and you will try to do what you can here
and there? [Comments from public consultation meeting*]
* Reference number of respondent
Summary of Consultation Analysis – Ditton Lodge First School
Location
St John’s
Avenue,
Current
Newmarket,
CB8 8BL
St John’s
Consultation
Avenue,
Proposal
Newmarket,
CB8 8BL
St John’s
Avenue,
Recommendation
Newmarket,
CB8 8BL
Age Range
Maximum
number of
children
admitted in
each year
group
Reception –
Year 4
(Age 4 – 9)
30
(Number on
Roll Jan 08)
Reception –
Year 6
(Age 4 – 11)
30
(Number if
full)
Reception –
Year 6
(Age 4 – 11)
30
(Number if
full)
Number
on roll or
if full
143
210
210
Staff
Governors
Public
15
31
Total
46
Concerns about timing & funding of works
Whether the school could feed into Cambridgeshire for secondary
provision
Maintaining standards during the transition period
(from Ditton Lodge catchment respondents unless otherwise stated)
Q3 - Comment on proposal for Ditton Lodge School
Agreed
Disagreed
All respondents
56 (50%)
55 (50%)
Ditton Lodge catchment respondents
10 (71%)
4 (29%)
Well
Not Well
75%
25%
75%
25%
69%
31%
57%
43%
Have you had……
Yes
No
76%
24%
63%
37%
Formal Governing Body response – None
Responses relating to this school included:
- Cambridgeshire County Council
Cambridgeshire County Council supports the proposals in the document and the
timetable for their implication. Once the Council is aware of the result of this
consultation, and if appropriate, it will proceed to publish plans to extend the age
range of Ditton Lodge First School, to become an all through Primary School with
effect from 1 September 2011. [NM171*]
Some respondents saw the benefits of the changes being proposed
 The removal of the 3-tier system is a positive move, and the consultation
evening was professional and informative. The inclusion of Ditton Lodge in this
process is a benefit to the school and the town, but I do not wish to see it
simply 'tagging along'. DL is a good school, but could do better with more
parental involvement. [N57*]
But there were concerns about the disruption that the changes to the schools could
cause.
 I have two children currently year 1 and 4. Whilst I am happy that my youngest
will be able to stay the additional 2 years at Ditton Lodge I am concerned about
a) the disruption due to building work at the school and b) the effect on my
eldest of attending a middle school that is preparing to close. As a group of
parents we are exceedingly worried about the effect on the education of those
children caught in the middle. [NP27*]
 Daughter in year 3. If during 2 years at middle school the numbers drop, how
can you ensure that she won’t lose out on her education or facilities?
There were concerns about the loss of specialist facilities for years 5 and 6.
 Anyone who has been through 3 tier education would reinforce the benefits of
the system and that they flourish. The curriculum will be narrower by staying on
at primary school for an additional 2 years. I haven’t heard anything to reassure
me about the children wanting to move to Scaltback. [Comments from public
Need for Places
There was a desire for the number of places to be appropriate for the area’s needs.
 When was surplus data collated for primary and upper schools? Many parents
have moved their children from Newmarket because of the reorganisation. The
numbers may increase afterwards when parents move children back.
[Comments from staff/governor consultation meeting*]
 Has the proposed housing development opposite this school been taken into
account in the forecasts? [Comments from staff/governor consultation
meeting*]
There were concerns about the increased traffic and parking problems.
 Parking outside school is an issue due to drop kerbs etc. [Comments from
 Speaking on behalf of Ditton Lodge Community, what will be done about traffic
and transport arrangements as it is very congested out here already?
Some felt that as a Cambridgeshire school Ditton Lodge should feed to a
Cambridgeshire secondary school.
 Wouldn’t this be a good time to establish a secondary school catchment for
Ditton Lodge in Cambridgeshire for Cambridgeshire residents? [Comments
 If we’re a Cambridgeshire school, why are we feeding into a Suffolk high
school? [Comments from public consultation meeting*]
There were no comments relating to Specific Age Provision
SEN Provision
School Category
Funding and Land
There were concerns about the level and certainty of the funding.
 Building Schools for the Future programme – you commented that Suffolk’s
share could be £600m. Over what period would this be spent? How much is
spent refurbishing schools annually anyway? The refurbishment would come
out of the Cambridgeshire budget. [Comments from public consultation
meeting*]
 Large sums of money are discussed to reassure parents as if all this money will
be there, there might not be enough money to do everything required at
schools. [Comments from public consultation meeting*]
Summary of Consultation Analysis – Exning Primary School
Location
Oxford Street,
Exning,
Current
Newmarket,
CB8 7EW
Oxford Street,
Consultation
Exning,
Proposal
Newmarket,
CB8 7EW
Oxford Street,
Exning,
Recommendation
Newmarket,
CB8 7EW
Age Range
Maximum
number of
children
admitted in
each year
group
Reception –
Year 4
(Age 4 – 9)
27
(Number on
Roll Jan 08)
Reception –
Year 6
(Age 4 – 11)
15
(Number if
full)
Reception –
Year 6
(Age 4 – 11)
15
(Number if
full)
Number
on roll or
if full
88
105
105
Staff
Governors
Public
18
59
Total
77
Reducing the PAN to 15 will leave insufficient places for the local children.
It will be difficult to maintain standards in a smaller school.
Reducing the PAN will deny places to out of catchment and out of county
children
Standards could suffer for the children in the transitional years.
(from Exning catchment respondents unless otherwise stated)
Q3 - Comment on proposal for Exning School
Agreed
Disagreed
All respondents
53 (40%)
78 (60%)
Exning catchment respondents
6 (67%)
3 (33%)
Well
Not Well
71%
29%
71%
29%
68%
32%
69%
31%
Have you had……
Yes
No
100%
0%
75%
25%
Formal Governing Body response – None
There were concerns that the mixed-age classes that a PAN of 15 would require
would lead to a reduction in standards.
 The low level of pupil capping will have disastrous results for both Exning
school and its pupils. The class size reduction WILL lead to mixed age groups
in single classes. This will affect their education. Especially if the pupils are
related. [NP157*]
 Also, a PAN of 15 for Exning is quite frankly ludicrous. Any teacher will tell you
that if you resort to vertical classes you are not able to deliver the curriculum as
effectively. If you avoid vertical classes and instead teach classes with as few
as 15, the class dynamics are not good. Imagine spending the first seven years
of your education with the same 14 children, how limited and stunting. [NM40*]
 The government want to focus on social aspects. How can children build peer
groups and social development in small groups? [Comments from public
The loss of specialist teaching and facilities for year 5 and 6 children was stressed.
 My children are in year 4 and reception. Primary schools don’t need science
labs, but year 5+ do. Currently middle school children get specialist facilities,
but younger children won’t. They want to do science here. How will they do so
without a science lab? How will you be able to teach science up to age 11?
Concerns that parental choice and diversity were being reduced were expressed.
 Where is my choice? If I’m denied a place because I’m out of catchment then
where is the choice? I disagree that big schools = more choice. [Comments
from public consultation meeting*]
Need for Places
There were concerns that 15 places would be insufficient for the number of children
that there will be in future years.
 Limiting Exning's intake to 15 is foolish given the proposed new developments
in the area and the Studlands Park situation. [N58*]
 In the past the intake has been low due to people being worried about the 2 tier
system but this will certainly change with Burwell being full, Studlands selling
off their houses (which I have enclosed a report about) children being moved
from Paddocks shutting and also the new housing estate which is planned for
by Tesco's. [NP158*]
 Has any consideration been given to the influx of families into the area ie the
filling of over 200 family houses on studlands park and future developments in
Exning. How will you accommodate them. [NP153*]
Some parents living out of catchment were concerned that there would be no places
for their children.
 I strongly disagree with the proposal to reduce the number of places at Exning.
I live out of catchment and have chosen Exning for my son due to proximity to
work and the outstanding pre school he attends. I believe reducing the intake
would reduce the effectiveness of teaching at Exning. [NP164*]
 I am looking to move to Studlands. The estate agents told me that people from
Cambridgeshire are moving here to find cheaper property and to have a local
school. [Comments from public consultation meeting*]
 Burwell is full for the next 3 years, and this is the closest alternative school.
There were questions about how the PAN of 15 would be implemented.
 What happens to the children coming into school that are number
16/17/18............. on the list ? As Exning is currently the smallest school the
proposed changes are going to hit harder and this seems very unfair. [N59*]
 What would happen to children no 16-19? Forecasted registers remain in this
region, what happens to the children over the cap of 15 every year considering
they have spent up to two years with close links to the reception class?
[NM81*]
Exning sees itself as a village with different needs to Newmarket.
 We are different to the Newmarket schools as we serve this local community
and the needs of the village. [Comments from staff/governor consultation
meeting*]
The preservation of the school was welcomed, but there were concerns that making
the school smaller could be harmful to the village community.
 Although I agree with the 2 tier education system, and will be extremely happy
for my children to remain at their local village school until year 6, I am
concerned about the capping of places at Exning Primary School. It is already
a small school, and although I think this can be an advantage, I worry that the
school will become non-viable. Having said that I think keeping a school in the
village, however small is a good thing for my children and the community as a
whole. [N50*]
 I can only say I am glad to see Exning remain in the proposals as it would
damage the community not to have it there. What effect will limiting the places
to 15 each yr groups have? What extra facilities would be provided to/from
Exning - what help would be given to aid that. [NP113*]
 Exning Primary School and its good reputation is the heart of our village and by
making it a potential nonviable option for the future there is no doubt this will
have a knock on affect on the village. We want our school to grow and prosper
in future years, we want to retain our community status, we want our children to
belong to this community, have the option to walk to school and know their
school is safe from closure. [NM81*]
There were concerns that the school would be too small to provide everything for the
children.
 I think Exning school would be too small to survive on its own. I therefore think
it is very important that they are linked with another school. Laureate would be
the obvious school. [NP54*]
 Exning is the smallest school in the Newmarket area, so why reduce our size?
We will end up as a non-entity. This could jeopardise the survival of the school.
Surely with a PAN of 27 with 180+ pupils we would get more funding.
SEN Provision
There were concerns that reducing the PAN could limit the options for vulnerable
children.
 Does 15 places include any places needed for vulnerable children, SEN, social
services placements, etc? Do we have to hold open places for them?
School Category
Funding and Land
There were concerns that the school would suffer due to lower levels of funding in
the future.
 As funding is determined by numbers of pupils how will Exning School remain
at the standard currently set and a viable school for the future if the funding
they receive is so low due to the limited number of children allowed entry into
the school? [NM81*]
 If you lower numbers you will lower funding and so lower the money for staff.
Summary of Consultation Analysis – Houldsworth Valley Primary School
Location
Current
Rowley Drive,
Newmarket,
CB8 0PU
Consultation
Proposal
Rowley Drive,
Newmarket,
CB8 0PU
Rowley Drive,
CB8 0PU
Age Range
Reception –
Year 4
(with Nursery)
(Age 3 – 9)
Reception –
Year 6
(with Nursery)
(Age 3 – 11)
Reception –
Year 6
(with Nursery)
(Age 3 – 11)
Maximum
number of
children
admitted in
each year
group
Number
on roll or
if full
92
30
(Number on
Roll Jan 08)
60
(Number if
full)
30
(Number if
full)
420
210
Staff
Governors
Public
20
23
Total
43
The staff and governors were feeling put down by the supporters of
Paddocks Primary School.
How would disruption be minimised during any work at the school?
(from Houldsworth Valley catchment respondents unless otherwise stated)
Q3 - Comment on proposal for Houldsworth Valley &
Agreed
Disagreed
Paddocks Schools
All respondents
38 (21%)
141 (79%)
Houldsworth Valley catchment respondents
6 (21%)
23 (79%)
Well
Not Well
53%
47%
30%
70%
43%
57%
36%
64%
Have you had……
Yes
No
58%
42%
39%
61%
- Merger of Houldsworth Valley and Paddocks onto the Houldsworth Valley site
- Building a completely new school
- Headteacher Houldsworth Valley [NM126*]
- Jockey Club [NM170*]
- Letters & emails from local parents, residents, businesses and community
groups
There was some support for the merging of Houldsworth Valley with Paddocks.
 I consider the option of a single larger maintained primary school for the central
community of the town to be the one which would benefit the children and their
families the most. I believe this would, in the long run improve the educational
provision for the children and their families over decades to come. [NM126*]
 Another important consideration for me, would be the benefits of such an
option in relation the staff The development of such a school would in the long
term allow it to spread the work load of the many responsibilities which at
present fall on a smaller number of individuals within the schools. Considering
the welfare of staff and their work life balance; I think members of such a staff
would look back in appreciation in years to come. Spreading workload and
therefore reducing some stress and pressure on staff can only have a
beneficial effect on the pupils within classes being taught by such staff.
[NM126*]
But there were also concerns that merging the two schools would not improve
standards across the town.
 Houldsworth Valley has always been the least favourite school in Newmarket.
Merging Paddocks with it in the hope of improving its image is going to be a
huge gamble. There is no guarantee you will achieve a successful school,
more likely a large unpopular school that you will struggle to fill. [NP194*]
 Houldsworth Valley: - This is considered to be 1 of the or poorest primary in
Newmarket, hence its undercapacity - instead of merging it with Paddocks why
have the issues there not been addressed?? [NP166*]
Some people felt that the message of improving standards had been lost in the town.
 It is difficult for parents to see reasoned arguments from more than one
standpoint. The main message in the area is about closing Paddocks. How
can you get across the overall message about improving across the whole
area? [Comments from consultation meeting with staff & governing body*]
Need for Places
Some people felt that the merged school would ensure primary provision was where
the children live.
 I agree that Houldsworth Valley should merge with Paddocks due to the
geographical location - and also because many children who attend Paddocks
actually live in the Houldsworth Valley catchment area. [NP139*]
 Strongly agree with proposal for Paddocks-Houldsworth Valley merge and
expansion of rebuild on the Houldsworth Valley site. The site is ideal & in an
excellent location and for a large primary school there to meet the future needs
of the town's children, possibly into the 2030's. If necessary it will be able to
accept pupils from the All Saints area & who would need an alternative to St.
Louis, which may not be able to expand. A state of the art new primary school
is a very exciting prospect and I look forward to seeing the plans. [N131*]
 From the various options considered, I feel that the decision to close both
Paddocks and Houldsworth Valley schools and to create a new school is the
correct one. The site is large, in the best location for future growth and will be
ideal for an enhanced primary school. [NM169*]
While others felt that keeping the schools where they are would be more appropriate.
 Merging does not provide any additional school places given that two classes
of thirty would attend the new school. The Houldsworth Valley site is not
centrally placed for the catchment of the two schools. Parking and access is
already difficult. Most parents from the Scaltback area would have to drive to
school, further exacerbating the situation. [NP90*]
Some felt that a merger could be beneficial for the local community.
 If one were to consider the town centre as one community, such a school
would not only bring that community closer together but provide an essential
community resource. The agendas of Every Child Matters, Extended Schools,
Community Cohesion, Healthy Schools and others could be served more
effectively from a central community primary school. Such a school should
have child care facilities as required by the community, provision for family
support and access to other agencies as well as a place for out of school
community activities for the families of primary aged children. Some of this
community provision could also be provided for with close links to the adjacent
Newmarket College, the close proximity of which should also support the
children's learning and enrich the experiences of the pupils. [NM126*]
While others felt that communities could be damaged.
 The Houldsworth/Paddocks merger is not properly considered with regard to
impact both socially and physically on the surrounding area. [NP205*]
 I have worked at both the schools and can see both points of view. People are
very attached to their communities and to lose a school in that community
would be very hard. [Comments from consultation meeting with staff and
governing body*]
There were concerns about how the area around Houldsworth Valley would cope
with a PAN 60 school.
 If the merger goes ahead at the Houldsworth site, where will parents park when
they take their children to school? Rowley Drive is used as parking for people
who work in the town. They park there from around 8.30am -5pm and from a
highways point of view, the amount of extra traffic a 420-pupil school would
generate just cannot be catered for. It would be dangerous and an accident
waiting to happen. [N32*]
 I walk to school with my son every day, come rain or shine. If we were forced to
the Houldsworth Valley site this would not be the case. I would drive thus
adding to the congestion in the Rowley Drive area. [NP211*]
 If Paddocks merges with Houldsworth Vallet I will have to use a car each day to
take to school. At the moment we walk to school which help the environment,
conjestion & fitness of my son. [NP143*]
 How can you even consider placing a larger school in the grounds without
looking into the current traffic problems. […] There was no proof at all that any
thought has been given to the practicalities of locating a school so large in an
area already built up and suffering traffic problems. […] Furthermore what
impact will the additional noise and traffic have on the thousands of horses that
pass the school everyday? They are already spooked by the current volume
and noise from Houldsworth Valley School. And what impact will the race day
traffic have on the children’s safety? [NM140*]
 The temporary arrangements to re-house St Felix pupils at Houldsworth Valley
and Laureate Schools have demonstrated that this causes traffic chaos due to
lack of parking for dropping children off. Even using the current staggered start
and end times for the two different schools is not sufficient to avoid congestion,
and if all the children were operating as one whole school unit, this would be
impossible. [NM1a*]
 The Houldsworth Valley site on Rowley Drive is very close to the centre of
Newmarket and is a road used by race horses. If the merger were to go ahead
many Paddocks children would have to travel by car to school. This would not
only increase the carbon footprint for the town but would increase congestion in
an area which is already a problem. There are already huge tailbacks on the
Exning Road/Rowley Drive junction in the mornings due to volume of traffic, the
road system near Waitrose and the horse crossing [NM25*]
 You need to ensure that the Jockey Club is involved in discussions on access
and road safety. On race days traffic is a nightmare. [Comments from public
 However, we would ask that, even at this early stage, any proposals which
Suffolk County Council may put forward take full account of the impact that
implementing such proposals may have on the racing industry in relation to
increased traffic, pedestrian use, noise etc on the movement of horses along
the Town's horsewalks and across roads at horse crossings [NM170*]
There were concerns that a larger school would be less personal and children might
suffer.
 A school of this size and nature will be I do not want my children to attend a
school of this size. I prefer a small school like Houldsworth Valley. I do not want
the disruption of a school merger when so many other things are changing. Our
children need stability at this time. [NP195*]
 I think that parents of small children prefer small schools. They get more
personal care. All the teachers know all the pupils. [Comments from
consultation meeting with the public*]
But some people felt that a larger school would benefit children due to the ability to
offer a greater breadth of opportunities.
 better placed to effectively cater for the diverse needs, interests and strengths
of the children. This will especially be the case in relation to the abilities of the
children up to year six. [NM126*]
 I am most excited about the potential for a new, bigger school offering so much
more to children than the present two smaller ones, eg in such as art, music,
drama, non-curricula interests and after-school activities, some involving the
community at large. A bigger school with more staff I am sure would result in
extended interests and expertise, advantaging all children. [NM169*]
 I have a daughter at Houldsworth Valley and at Scaltback. The advantage I see
of having a larger school is the breadth of what a larger school offers.
Houldsworth Valley and schools with a smaller intake are dragged down by
poorer pupils and minorities as there can be no structured teaching according
to ability. Larger primary schools are a positive thing. We have leakage
because the our schools are not good enough. [Comment from public
consultation meeting at Newmarket College*]
SEN Provision
School Category
Funding and Land
Some people were in favour of the merger onto the Houldsworth Valley site.
 The Houldsworth Valley site is clearly the most suited for any proposed merger.
I give my backing for these plans 100% - and do not feel the need to protest in
any way. [NP179*]
 Everyone has got to stop thinking its Houldsworth and Paddocks – its not, this
will be a brand new school on this site. [Comments from public consultation
meeting*]
While others thought the merged school should be located somewhere else.
 I agree in principle to this option [the merger] BUT feel that due thought &
consideration must be given to the location of the 'merged' school. Newmarket
is divided on so many levels - this is an opportunity to address one aspect, but
could become even more divisive. The campaign that has already started in the
town makes it a "them" and "us" issues. This is not beneficial to children's
education, nor to harmony in the town. [NP56*]
 Paddocks & Houldsworth Valley merge, and go to Scaltback Middle, facilities
already in place. [NP4*]
 I don’t have a problem with a larger school, but believe it should be a new
school on a new site with no ties to either of the old schools. My preferred
option would probably be for them to stay as they are but if it is a new school it
should be a new site. [Comments from public consultation meeting*]
And others felt that the Houldsworth Valley site should be used as part of the
College.
 Has Houldsworth Valley Primary School been considered as being an annex to
the Community College? Logistically for the running of the the school it would
work better than annexing Scaltback. [N29*]
Some people felt that if the merged school happens then it should be a total newbuild.
 A new larger school would need to be equipped for teaching children well into
this century and I believe this option would allow for that to greater effect. To
this end I feel it must be a new build to reflect the aspirations we should be
working to as we plan for the future. If finances are available now for such a
development I believe we need to grasp this opportunity. [NM126*]
Summary of Consultation Analysis – Laureate CP School
Location
Current
Exning Road,
Newmarket,
CB8 0AN.
Consultation
Proposal
Exning Road,
Newmarket,
CB8 0AN.
Exning Road,
CB8 0AN.
Age Range
Reception –
Year 4 (with
Nursery)
(Age 3 – 9)
Reception –
Year 6 (with
Nursery)
(Age 3 – 11)
Reception –
Year 6 (with
Nursery)
(Age 3 – 11)
Maximum
number of
children
admitted in
each year
group
Number
on roll or
if full
130
33
(Number on
Roll Jan 08)
30
(Number if
full)
30
(Number if
full)
210
210
Staff
17
Governors
Public
8
32
Total
57
Keeping years 5 and 6 will help the school’s SEN provision.
Standards could suffer for the children in the transitional years.
The new housing in the area will mean that there may not be enough
primary school places.
Many people want to retain the 3-tier system in Newmarket.
(from Laureate catchment respondents unless otherwise stated)
Q3 - Comment on proposal for Laureate School
Agreed
Disagreed
All respondents
70 (53%)
62 (47%)
Laureate catchment respondents
15 (58%)
11 (42%)
Well
Not Well
36%
64%
38%
63%
48%
52%
32%
68%
Have you had……
Yes
No
46%
54%
39%
61%
Formal Governing Body response – [NP117*] supported:
- The proposals for Laureate CP School
- Closer links with Exning Primary School
There was praise for the school and confidence in their ability to cope:
 Our Ofsted was fantastic our heads are brilliant and our grounds are extensive
enough to happily extend. [NP135*]
Concern was expressed for the children most affected by the review:
 What plans in place for continuing high standards during transition? How will
you maintain teaching standards throughout this period where there will be one
year group for two years? How will you get teachers to continue? Teachers will
be looking for other jobs before the school closes. [Comments from public
The schools ability to cater for the different needs of years 5 and 6 children was
questioned:
 My concern is for people who are co-ordinating a subject that they won’t have
experience of planning for years 5 & 6. [Comments from staff consultation
meeting*]
Need for Places
Concern was expressed that with the empty houses in Studlands Park and the
proposed development on the Hatchfield Farm site there will be insufficient places for
all the children on this side of town:
 I think the Americans moving away from Studlands will have an impact, it’s not
new housing, its empty houses waiting to be filled. I’m worried this will be
limiting capacity for the future. [Comments from public consultation meeting*]
It was suggested that Laureate could be merged with another school onto the
Scaltback site:
 Paddocks and Laureate Schools are poor sites and Scaltback sits between
them. Therefore, I would close these two schools and resite as a NEW school
on the Scaltback Site. [NM57*]
The school should stay where it is as it is important to the community:
 I would really like Laureate school to stay open as a school this end of town is
very important. [NP138*]
 Laureate School to me must be allowed to stay because it is an incredibly close
knit school which has an amazing community spirit. [NP135*]
Concerns were raised about the impact of increased traffic at the school:
 The temporary arrangements to re-house St Felix pupils at Houldsworth Valley
and Laureate Schools have demonstrated that this causes traffic chaos due to
lack of parking for dropping children off. [NM5*]
There was support for the idea of Laureate developing formal links with Exning
Primary School:
 We agree with all the proposals. As a governing body we would be interested
in discussing the possibility of a federation with Exning school. [NP117*]
 I think Exning school would be too small to survive on its own. I therefore think
it is very important that they are linked with another school. Laureate would be
the obvious school. [NP54*]
SEN Provision
Keeping SEN pupils for an additional 2 years was seen as a positive thing:
 We often feel we’re making progress with SEN pupils. We build a relationship
with parents. We worry about the future of our pupils after they leave us. One
parent was worried that we might lose our small school feeling and ethos when
we gain year groups. Some of the methods we are using are having a big
effect by year 4. Middle school uses a different method. We could make so
much more progress if we kept them for another year. [Comments from staff
 With the amount of special need and foreign children that attend Laureate I
think it's a necessity to keep it open and to keep disruption to a minimum,
especially as the plans to extend have already been drawn up. [NP89*]
School Category
Funding and Land
Respondents were pleased with the addition of the extra year groups to the school
and confident that they could be accommodated:
 I feel that Laureate CP School is well placed to absorb a further two classes
onto the present site. The site is flat and so building would be relatively straight
forward. There are already plans to build onto the present nursery building and
create space for two classes. Further plans are on-going for a further
classroom attached to the main school building. [NP160*]
 I strongly agree with the proposal to develop Laureate primary & nursery to
accommodate years 5 & 6. I believe the site has the space and has an
excellent management team which would be able to develop the school and
cope with the organisational factors of the merger brilliantly. The site has more
than adequate space for development and is easily accessible. [NP134*]
Summary of Consultation Analysis – Moulton CEVCP School
Location
School Road,
Moulton,
Current
Newmarket,
CB8 8PR
School Road,
Consultation
Moulton,
Proposal
Newmarket,
CB8 8PR
School Road,
Moulton,
Recommendation
Newmarket,
CB8 8PR
Age Range
Maximum
number of
children
admitted in
each year
group
Reception –
Year 4
(Age 4 – 9)
30
(Number on
Roll Jan 08)
Reception –
Year 6
(Age 4 – 11)
30
(Number if
full)
Reception –
Year 6
(Age 4 – 11)
30
(Number if
full)
Number
on roll or
if full
134
210
210
Staff
Governors
Public
20
51
Total
71
The loss of specialist facilities and teaching for years 5 and 6.
That building work at the schools would be completed on time and could
be afforded.
Where the extension of Moulton CEVCP School would go.
There were doubts about the ability of Newmarket College to cope with
the extra children.
The loss of the three tier system in the area
(from Moulton catchment respondents unless otherwise stated)
Q3 - Comment on proposal for Moulton School
Agreed
Disagreed
All respondents
62 (53%)
55 (47%)
Moulton catchment respondents
8 (42%)
11 (58%)
Well
Not Well
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
33%
67%
Have you had……
Yes
No
48%
52%
38%
62%
Formal Governing Body response – [NM120*] expressed concerns about:
- The ability of the school site to take two extra year groups
- The potential problems that increased traffic could bring
- Funding for the process
- Moulton Parish Council [NM93*]
Concern was expressed about the loss of specialist facilities and outdoor space for
Years 5 & 6:
 How much money will be allocated to provide the resources that I would expect
a school teaching children up to year 6 to provide (IT, library, PE, music...)?
However much the council tries to convince us otherwise, the proposed
reorganisation will remove many opportunities from children in years 5 and 6.
[NM47a*]
 The first schools cannot really offer enough space for children in years 5 and 6.
It may be within legal requirements, but anyone who has watched children
playing in the playground at Moulton School (and I have worked there as a
midday supervisor) can see that an additional two year groups will be too
many. [NM47d*]
And the disruption that the children will suffer during any building work:
 It was made very clear at the Moulton school meeting that parents were not
happy that an additional 60 pupils would need to be accommodated in the
school. In order for this to be possible, huge re-modelling of the building is
required that would mean a great deal of disruption and stress for all who are
working or learning in the building. [NM74*]
As well as fears that the new facilities would not be ready in time:
 So far as Moulton school is concerned the Parish Council, parents and
teachers need to be reassured that the building of new class rooms, the
upgrading of changing facilities and a new school assembly hall to
accommodate the increase pupil numbers, will be ready by 2011. [NM93*]
Need for Places
There were no comments specifically relating to Need for Places
Concerns were expressed regarding the increase to traffic and parking around the
school:
 Current school car parking facilities at Moulton School are only just adequate
for the present number on roll; increasing the traffic at this school to
accommodate a further 60 pupils would be dangerous and chaotic. [NM1a*]
 The narrow school lane is barely able to accommodate current traffic flow, and
cars for a further 60 pupils would make this dangerous as well as seriously
congested. [NM74*]
 Also, another major concern is the problem of road safety and increased
congestion outside Moulton school. A local landowner has generously
constructed and leased a car park to the Parish Council, opposite the school
gate. This off road site has been built and landscaped to an exceptionally high
standard, and is maintained and financed by Moulton ratepayers. This
achieved an urgently needed solution to current traffic problems and safety
issues on School Road, the B1085 and the junction with Chippenham Road,
however the car park will be totally inadequate should pupil numbers increase
significantly. It is therefore imperative that immediate plans are put in place to
accommodate the additional number of vehicles bringing and collecting pupils,
as well as more staff cars and commercial vehicles. The serious congestion
outside the school gate must not be allowed to recur, as it creates major
difficulties and hazardous conditions for neighbouring householders, village
residents, school staff, parents, pupils and visitors, pedestrians and other road
users. [NM93*]
 On top of all this concern has been expressed locally and by Moulton Parish
Council as to the potential of the site to be enlarged sufficiently to cope with
increased traffic movement and parking. Road Safety is an especial concern
given the location of the school site at a junction. [NM120*]
And the harm that the proposals could have on the local community
 The relationships between Pyramid schools and school communities are being
sorely tested by the uncertainties generated by the current consultation. If
confidence in the process and those at senior level within the County Council is
not to be irrevocably diminished a much greater degree of honesty, clarity and
realism needs to be demonstrated. [NM120*]
Concern was expressed about the effect larger schools would have on the children:
 Due to increasing expansion of Housing in this area, the schools already seem
full. Moulton has a large class size and adding extra years will decrease the
education standard. The money spend on adapting schools would be better
increasing facilities in existing schools and I believe my children's education will
suffer, specially in the formative years of the new system. I believe the class
systems should be reduced dramatically (as in Scotland). [NP144*]
There were no comments specifically relating to Specific Age Provision
SEN Provision
School Category
Funding and Land
Concern was expressed about funding:
 How do we know that the money due to come from central government is safe
in the current financial climate? Will the money come to us soon enough for
this process? [Comment from staff/governor consultation meeting*]
 Have all the costings been done to ensure that the proposed work fits the
available funds? [Comment from staff/governor consultation meeting*]
 Very little detail has been given as to the level of funding available both
specifically for individual schools and globally to provide the range and quality
of provision needed to provide a “21st Century Learning Vision”. It is vital that
the timescale is realistic and affordable both in financial and personnel terms.
[NM120*]
And the potential of the site to expand:
 Where will the new buildings go on this site? [Comment from public
 The timescale does not seem to include time for building new provisions at
primary schools, to accommodate the extra two years. There will be insufficient
room in the dining hall at Moulton, for the extra children and insufficient room
for changing facilities for the older children. [NP44*]
 Can Moulton cope with 60 extra pupils without expansion? What extra facilities
will be provided? [Comments from public consultation meeting*]
 If the school is to accommodate Year 5 and Year 6 classes this will require
considerable expansion in terms of accommodation and site infrastructure.
Investment will be required to provide a new school hall, classes, toilets,
cloakrooms, changing facilities, library, ICT suite and other specialist teaching
bases. The office accommodation and staff room facilities will also require
relocating and expanding. [NM120*]
Summary of Consultation Analysis – Paddocks CP School
Location
Age Range
Maximum
number of
children
admitted in
each year
group
Current
Rochfort
Avenue,
Newmarket,
CB8 0DL
Reception –
Year 4
(Age 4 – 9)
30
(Number on
Roll Jan 08)
Consultation
Proposal
Rowley Drive,
Newmarket,
CB8 0PU
Reception –
Year 6
(with Nursery)
(Age 3 – 11)
60
(Number if
full)
Reception –
Year 6
(Age 4 – 11)
30
(Number if
full)
Rochfort
Avenue,
Recommendation
Newmarket,
CB8 0DL
Number
on roll or
if full
134
420
210
Staff
14
Governors
Public
9
95
Total
118
Paddocks Primary School should remain where it is and not merge.
The best performing school in town should not be closed.
Nobody wants a large primary school.
(from Paddocks catchment respondents unless otherwise stated)
Q3 - Comment on proposal for Paddocks and
Agreed
Disagreed
Houldsworth Valley School
All respondents
38 (21%)
141 (79%)
Paddocks catchment respondents
2 (6%)
34 (94%)
Well
Not Well
21%
79%
33%
67%
18%
82%
14%
86%
Have you had……
Yes
No
56%
44%
30%
70%
49 letters and emails were received commenting on Paddocks, almost all of which
were opposed to merger with Houldsworth Valley.
45 questionnaires contained comments on Paddocks. 42 of these were opposed to
the merger with Houldsworth Valley.
We also received 60 completed copies of a questionnaire organised by Paddocks’
parents – all opposing the merger, a petition signed by 68 people opposing the
proposed closure of Paddocks, St Felix and Scaltback schools and a large ‘letter’
comprising 4 double bed sheets covered in comments in support of Paddocks
Primary School.
Formal Governing Body response – no formal response received
- Paddocks Must Stay Open pressure group [NM30, NM56, NM71, NM78*]
- Jockey Club Estates [NM170*]
- Petition with 68 names [NM162*]
- 60 completed copies of a parent organised questionnaire
- E-petition with 362 hits
- ‘Letter’ comprising 4 double sheets sewn together.
groups
Relevant extracts of these responses are included where appropriate in the analysis
below.
There was concern that closing a high-performing primary school could cause a drop
in standards:
 Do not close Paddocks School. If you want to raise standards you cannot
justify closing such a popular successful and outstanding school. [N95*]
 I am srongly against Paddocks school closure. If you have money to spend,
put it into improving what we already have. Target Newmarket college and
Houldsworth who are both underperforming. Paddocks is performing brilliantly
so please leave it alone. [N93*]
 I think that the SOR has seriously underestimated the high quality of education
offered at Paddocks. Our children are happy and fulfilled learners and we as
parents strongly believe that Paddocks offers a sound and engaging and
successful education for our children. There is simply no insentive for us to
agree to the closure of this exemplerary school and opt for a much larger
school. There is absolutely no evidence that the creation of a merged school
will raise standards for our children and it is very propable that standards will
fall. [N60*]
 During this review, we were told that no primary schools would close - so why
now do you plan to close Paddocks? It is a thriving school and under Mr
Sexton's leadership has moved from strength to strength. There is a tightknit
relationship between staff, parents and pupils and we regard it as an extended
family. Don't tear the heart out of this 'family' by closing Paddocks and forcing
our children to go to a merged Paddocks/Houldsworth school - which will be
untried and untested. [N32*]
 I strongly oppose the merger of Paddocks Primary and Houldsworth Valley
Primary School. This would result in the closure of an excellent primary school
- that being Paddocks Primary School. A school with quality caring and
professional staff, excellent results, proven increased performance, good
communication and high morale throughout the school. Maximum class







numbers as a result of popularity & all these factors contributed to Paddocks
Primary School being number one choice for the education of my children.
Within walking distance of our home is an added bonus. The closure of such a
high quality popular school would be a denial for my children to a deserved
quality and exclusive primary education. [NP35*]
Paddocks school is already achieving much of Suffolk County Council's "Vision
for Learning 2008". Ofsted have stated that the overall teaching at Paddocks is
good and some is outstanding. Why would you consider closing such a strong
and effective school which is realising your own "Vision for Learning". You
should be celebrating it. [NM25*]
Please can you say in detail how the proposed merger will improve on the
outstanding standards set at Paddocks. Paddocks offers a unique type of child
led education in an informal free-flowing environment, facilitated by its open
plan classrooms and small size. Mr Sexton, through his strong leadership,
over the last nine years has developed a strong and cohesive team of
teachers. Their effectiveness speaks for itself in the Ofsted report. The small
size, layout, site and staff are intrinsic to the proven success of Paddocks. If
the merger went ahead you have no guarantee that any of the Paddocks staff
would want jobs in the new school as it would be vastly different to the one they
chose to work in. Paddocks is the stronger of the two schools in terms of
quality of teaching and Ofsted. The Paddocks ethos cannot be transferred to a
larger school in a more formal building such as Houldsworth Valley so the
inevitable result will then be a school offering a lower standard of education
than Paddocks currently provides and this is not acceptable to the children of
Newmarket. [NM56a*]
I would also mention that there is difference between a satisfactory school
(Houldsworth Valley) and a good/outstanding one (Paddocks). No evidence
has been presented that would suggest an improvement in standards would
result from this merger. Most feel standards would decline. [NM50b*]
There is a very high risk that standards of education would fall and this cannot
be justified. There is also no guarantee that staff expertise currently at
Paddocks would be transferred to the amalgamated site. [NM103*]
We appreciate that there are some schools in Suffolk with the 5-11 age range
of 2 FE or more which are successful. However, our own research shows that
73.7% of them do not offer the high quality education that Paddocks can
provide. Our point therefore is that these statistics show that there is a very
high risk that the proposed new school will not offer the same quality of
education as Paddocks does and standards will fall. The foundation stone of
the School Organisation Review is to raise standards therefore it is not
acceptable to take the risk of closing a proven strong primary school with the
hope that standards might be maintained in a merged school when these
aspirations are based soley on the Councils own hopes and unvalidated
expectations. [NM56c*]
I sent my daughter to Paddocks school because I wanted her to experience the
environment and opportunities which Paddocks offers. Houldsworth Valley's
most recent Ofsted report states 'taking the last three years together, standards
have been slightly below average overall at the end of Year 2 and at the end of
Year 4. The school recognises that standards in writing and in mathematics are
not as high as they could be, because basic skills are not practised enough.'
Why would any parent want their child to be moved from Paddocks to a school
which achieves lesser standards? [NM124*]
Paddocks Primary School is an extremely popular and high achieving school
that has excellent Ofsted reports. The ethos of the school is clearly evident and
the dedication and hard work of the head teacher and teaching staff to reach
and maintain its high standards is valued by the children and parents. The
open plan design, setting and size of the school all contribute to its pleasant,
personal and individual approach and provide an atmosphere conducive to
learning. Merging with another school on a different site would risk the
destruction of everything that has been achieved and alter the strong and
successful primary school that has been developed under the head teaching of
Mr Sexton. [NM128*]
 Paddocks school has worked hard to create an excellent learning environment
in which our children are thriving. A newly merged school, with new leadership
and staffing would struggle to replicate the standards Paddocks meet as it
takes time to build a cohesive staff body who are working towards shared goals
and achieving such such high standards. [NM166*]
Diversity of provision and parental choice would be reduced by merging two schools.
 merging the schools does not offer more choice but less. [N86*]
 More choice must be given so all parents can make an effective choice as to
where their children are educated 'If Paddocks school closes then choice is
being taken away' as is the diversity of the provision which the county itself
says in the SOR document should be maintained. [NP203*]
 The kind of diversity schools should offer should be a distinct identity and
ethos, not size. I do not know of any parents who take acreage into
consideration when choosing a school for their children. The quality and type of
education offered is what matters. Paddocks is unique on both these points, so
closing it would limit diversity in Newmarket. [NM25*]
 We would like the decision to close/amalgamate Paddocks Primary School to
be reconsidered. This is a good school, with good results and losing it would
mean a lack of choice for people in the locale. [NM153*]
 Reducing the number of primary schools in Newmarket is by definition reducing
diversity, and restricting parental choice. Families living in the catchment area
of the new school would be unlikely to have access to places in other schools,
particularly if the plans to reduce class sizes at St. Louis and Exning Primaries
go ahead. [NM166*]
The merger could cause increased disruption for Paddocks pupils on top of the
disruption that the change to 2-tier could cause.
 How can you guarantee a smooth transfer when merging the children.
Paddocks is at a disadvantage. This would create problems. They need some
familiarity especially for the young ones. The older years education could suffer
too. What will you do if this happens. [NP186*]
 Under these proposals children currently at Paddocks will have to change
school several times. Pupils and their education will suffer for at least the next
6-7 years until it all settles down. children only get one chance. [NP172*]
 As the proposals stand at the moment [my child’s] catchment school Paddocks
Primary is due to close. I feel his education will be disrupted whilst the changes
take effect and the new 2 tier system settles down. [NP132*]
 The merging/movement of pupils from Paddocks to the Houldsworth Valley site
would be extremely disruptive to such young pupils who are only just settling
into a school routine. [NP70*]
 Paddocks children are going to be at a total disadvantage with the move, as
this will be a new environment for them, new teachers, new children. For some
also, it will be just for a couple of years before they then have to move again.
[NM67*]
 The proposed alteration of the school system would create several quick
changes for the children involved, with very short periods of time in which to




adjust to the new setting. As the new schools would be the product of a
combination of different ethos and values, it is uncertain how these changes
would be managed and doubtful that this would be successful. This disruption
is very likely to ruin the education of a generation of Newmarket school
children. [NM128*]
One of the supposed justifications for closing the middle schools was to reduce
the number of points of transfer, yet by closing Paddocks this would inevitably
lead to further unnecessary disruption for most of the pupils who will be
attending that school over the next few years. [NM164*]
For Paddocks children the transition in to a two tier system will be far from
smooth. Paddocks children will be transitioning from the happy, secure and
familiar environment of the Paddocks school, into the much larger, unfamiliar
and unknown environment of the new school. Because the school will be new,
parents and even staff will be unfamiliar with the new establishment and there
are bound to be at least a few hiccups as everyone finds their feet. Parents will
lack confidence in the environment in which they are leaving their children
because they will have been unable to view it in action prior to their children
attending. For the same reason, parents will be unable to make informed
decisions about whether the new school is well suited to their child's needs.
However "well managed" the transition may be, pupils and parents will be
stepping into the unknown. [NM166*]
How do we retain pupils when we merge? What about the immediate effects
once the merger has been decided? All other schools in the area know they
will have their Year 1s and they will stay in that school. Some parents are
ringing up now saying ‘Why should I come to your school when its closing?
How do I answer this question? I can’t work against the notion that this school
is going to close. [Comments from staff consultation meeting*]
I am vehemently opposed to the merger or a closure. You underestimate
change - it can make or break a child, especially at vulnerable times in their
life. Some children will get 2 years at Paddocks then change to a larger school
– doesn’t reassure parents. What alternatives are available? Paddocks
children will have an extra transition to the new school and then to secondary
school. Houldsworth Valley children will not have this disadvantage. You have
said there is a dip in progress when you change – so why introduce an extra
one? I appreciate that they will be monitored by damage could be irreparable.
Need for Places
There were concerns that the plans did nothing to deal with surplus places:
 I attended the meeting and heard how you plan to close a primary school as
there are too many, yet your proposal still offers the same amount of places at
Paddocks and Houldsworth Valley. How about reducing the number of places
at Paddocks? If you must close a school, close either Houldsworth Valley or
Laureate as these both under perform and are under subscribed. [NP169*]
 The only further reason which the review gives for the proposed merge is to
provide "The required number of places across the area" (PI5). Paddocks
school has 30 places. Houldsworth Valley School has 30 places. The proposed
merged school would have 60 places. There is no need to merge the schools
to provide 60 places as the two separate schools provide the same combined
number. [NM166*]
 I don’t understand how merging two 1FE schools to a 2FE school would
change the number of places? [Comments from public consultation meeting*]
There was some support for the merger on the Houldsworth Valley site as it would
locate the school where most of the children live:
 I agree that Houldsworth Valley should merge with Paddocks due to the
geographical location - and also because many children who attend Paddocks
actually live in the Houldsworth Valley catchment area. [NP139*]
 Strongly agree with proposal for Paddocks-Houldsworth Valley merge and
expansion of rebuild on the Houldsworth Valley site. The site is ideal & in an
excellent location and for a large primary school there to meet the future needs
of the town's children, possibly into the 2030's. If necessary it will be able to
accept pupils from the All Saints area & who would need an alternative to St.
Louis, which may not be able to expand. A state of the art new primary school
is a very exciting prospect and I look forward to seeing the plans. [NP131*]
There was also some support for having the merged school on a different site or
merging different schools:
 Paddocks School: Could be merged with Laureate as geographically close and
put into Scaltback site less problems with parking. How can Scaltback not be
suitable for younger children? Already has year 5 & 6 so suitable for them. The
classrooms are all suitable plus hall and dining room. As agreed by your panel
has good sporting facilities an asset to the town why not use!! [NP73*]
 Why build when, the schools, are, already there, to be used. Paddocks &
Houldsworth Valley merge, and go to Scaltback Middle, facilities already in
place. [NP4*]
 A merger on a neutral site would make sense. Why not close Laureate and
Paddocks and amalgamate them on Scaltback and leave Houldsworth?
[Comments from governor consultation meeting*]
 Wouldn’t it be cheaper to use Scaltback site than Houldsworth valley site.
 This school should stay open, it is a shame that the pressure is on this school
to merge. Exning at 0.5 FE, All Saints with little space to expand, Houldsworth
Valley with a history of poor performance. It’s a shame that it is this school and
not one of those. If there has to be a merger I would close Exning and dilute
their pupils across the town and merge Houldsworth and Laureate? Laureate is
an old building with portacabins. Spend money on Scaltback, lift its facilities.
Scaltback is a good site on the fringe of the town. I’m far from convinced this
should be a school to merge. Although if All Saints CEVAP didn’t have a
church badge that should merge. [Comments from governor consultation
meeting*]
There were concerns that a large school on the Houldsworth Valley site would cause
serious traffic and parking problems:
 The likely traffic situation should Paddocks and Houldsworth Valley merge is
potentially very dangerous. [N58*]
 The Paddocks site is within easy walking distance for families within its
catchment area and a little beyond its boundaries. The Houldsworth Valley site
is considerably further for families in much of this area and would likely results
in more families travelling to school by car. This would impact on traffic along
Exning road and at the Rowley Drive Junction, the parking, and pedestrians
would need very serious consideration for their safety. [NP203*]
 Many pupils walk, bike or scooter to Paddocks and will not be able to as it is a
greater distance which will lead to major problems with Parking and traffic for
400+ pupils and parents especially on a main road also used by horses at this
particular time. [NP196*]
 What about the traffic around Houldsworth Valley? On race days it is a very
busy area – a fatality waiting to happen. The school already staggers the day
to ease these problems. [Comments from staff consultation meeting*]
The loss of Paddocks Primary School could be damaging to the local community:
 If you really want people to have their say then you have got what you wanted
from the Paddocks community! If you can't take the community with you then
this proposal is dead in the water. Over 360 have signed the e-petition. Ofted
will be very interested in community cohesion when they knock at your door.
You are proposing to destroy a community. [NP172*]
 We are being penalised for living in a town; to safeguard village schools even if
they have decreasing pupil numbers and yet have complete disregard for a
town school is very unfair. Paddocks Primary School is similar to a village
school in atmosphere and outlook and plays a vital role in bringing the
community together. [NP90*]
 The proposal to merge Paddocks with Houldsworth Valley has caused great
concern within the two communities and is not welcomed by either side. The
proposals have polarized the parents involved to the extent that it would be
very difficult to create a unified school. Many parents have campaigned very
strongly to keep the schools separate and there is a distinct lack of cohesion
between the two groups of parents. [NM79*]
 I do not wish this school to merge with Houldsworth Valley as it would be
stopping Paddocks serving its community, and it would involve shutting a
successful school with a unique environment which cannot just be duplicated
elsewhere. [NM143*]
 throughout the consultation period, the Paddocks community has expressed
very clearly and very publicly a strong opposition to the merge. This alone
should be cause to abandon the proposal. What kind of atmosphere would
prevail during the transition process and then linger in the new school when
parents and pupils alike have so explicitly declared they do not want to be
forced into this? Furthermore, the animosity which has regrettably arisen
between the two school communities during the review process would hinder
even the best of efforts to create a cohesive community in the new school. With
this in mind, it is clear to me that a merged PaddockslHouldsworth Valley
school would simply become the new "unpopular" school in Newmarket.
[NM166*]
It is not only the school, but also the Houldsworth Valley area that is unpopular with
parents:
 Many of our children come from the Houldsworth Valley area. Parents don’t
want their children going to a school there. [Comments from staff consultation
meeting*]
 Houldsworth Valley site will always have that stigma, whatever the school is
called. [Comments from governor consultation meeting*]
 Parents are not going to choose Houldsworth Valley. [Comments from
governor consultation meeting*]
There were concerns that a large school could be more impersonal and that children
could get less individual attention:
 A merged school three times as bid as Paddocks cannot provide my son with
the high level of care and attention he gets at Paddocks. He will be a number,
not a name, in a merged school. [N32*]
 At Paddocks there is a lot of interaction between year groups. In a school of 60
people per year group this is likely to disappear. A bigger school is not a better
school when it comes to social development. [NP211*]
 I disagree with the supposition that larger schools could be better for the
children. I can see that they are financially more efficient but this is one
important area where small additional spending to maintain the education
quality is worth my tax. My child attends Paddocks and I have spoken at length
with the headmaster and teachers. I have friends (and teachers) who are
teachers and I have not yet spoke to 1 who thinks large schools offer better
education. A more personalised school must be better for young children a they
feel a need for security and not to be overwhelmed. We have never seen this in
our children. [NP83*]
 Primary schools should be small, intimate places where children as young as 4
feel safe, secure and not intimidated by huge school buildings and much larger
numbers of older/bigger children. Although accepting that class sizes will be no
more than 30, to have a year group of 60 is far too big for this young age
group. It holds no advantage whatsoever for the children themselves - purely
the council for monetary purposes. Bigger is not better and does not mean
greater diversity [NM67*]
 Children like to be seen as individuals. The bigger the school the more likely a
child gets lost in it. The school is oversubscribed here. At a bigger school
surplus places would just increase. Parents would find somewhere else.
 I haven’t seen anything that says a bigger school is better. Smaller is better as
children get a more individual treatment. We have everything the children want
here. [Comments from public consultation meeting*]
There could be a greater problem with bullying at a larger school:
 The new school will not be as friendly or comforting because of its size. With
such large pupil numbers there will be more chances of bullying and because
of the size it will go undetected. We will lose the personal touch where
everybody knows everybody. Something that attracts people to the friendly
environment of paddocks. I am not happy for my child to attend such a large
school. [NP197*]
 I am extremely concerned about what problems accompany a 'super' primary
that we don't currently experience at Paddocks, such as bullying. Within a
larger school there are many more corners to hide that go unnoticed, more
children in the playgrounds makes it more difficult to spot any potential bullying
scenarios. I also don't believe that my child will be developed and encouraged
as an individual. At the moment, they are nurtured and encouraged to be
individuals. I do not see how in such a large school this will continue to be the
case. [NM106*]
 I am anti large schools at primary age level. I feel it is very intimidating for a
four year old to attend a school of 420 pupils, standards will slip and bullying
may thrive between the year groups (even at this young age). [NM116*]
 I wanted to bring my child to a relatively small school. In a larger school I am
concerned there would be more corners for things like bullying. In this school
the small, tight community sorts things out. If a merger went ahead I would
consider moving. [Comments from public consultation meeting*]
SEN Provision
School Category
Funding and Land
There were concerns that the Paddocks site would be sold for housing:
 The worst scenario for local residents living between Paddocks and Scaltback
would be that both would be sold for housing. This would create a huge estate
which wouldn’t be pleasant to live in. [Comments from staff/gov consultation
meeting at Ditton Lodge First School]
 I feel that I must question why Paddocks has been singled out for closure. Is
the real reason not "educational" but "financial" because the Paddocks site is
probably the most valuable site if disposed of for residential development?
[NM164*]
The amount of playing fields could be reduced because of the new buildings that will
be needed:
 How will you ensure that the Houldsworth Valley site has the same amount of
sports areas once the school has been enlarged and parking areas expanded?
Summary of Consultation Analysis – St Louis RC Primary School
Location
Current
Fordham Road,
Newmarket,
CB8 7AA
Consultation
Proposal
Fordham Road,
Newmarket,
CB8 7AA
Fordham Road,
CB8 7AA
Age Range
Reception –
Year 4
(with Nursery)
(Age 3 – 9)
Reception –
Year 6
(with Nursery)
(Age 3 – 11)
Reception –
Year 6
(with Nursery)
(Age 3 – 11)
Maximum
number of
children
admitted in
each year
group
Number
on roll or
if full
167
45
(Number on
Roll Jan 08)
30
(Number if
full)
45
(Number if
full)
210
315
Staff
Governors
Public
26
90
Total
116
If the PAN is reduced then there will not be enough places for all the
Catholic children in the area. In addition, the school would become allCatholic, which would not be desirable.
If children cannot come to St Louis then they will go to other Catholic
schools in Bury St Edmunds or Cambridge, and so there will not be an
impact on numbers at other Newmarket schools.
Q3 - Comment on proposal for St Louis RCP School
Agreed
All respondents
46 (29%)
56 letters and emails were received commenting on St Louis, all of which were
opposed to reducing the PAN.
46 questionnaires contained comments on St Louis. 43 of these were opposed to
reducing the PAN.
- Keeping the PAN at 45 so the school could provide Catholic education for all
Catholic children
Disagreed
113 (71%)
-
The feasibility of expanding the school on its current site
Continuing to have mixed year group teaching
- Headteacher of St Louis Middle School [NM114*]
- Julie O’Connor (Catholic Diocese) [NM165*]
- Richard Spring (MP) [NM173*]
groups
There were concerns that reducing the PAN would reduce the amount of diversity in
Newmarket.
 With a PAN of 45 the school shows a good diversity; 70 -80% of the children
are Catholic or Christian, 20 -25% of the children have a different or no
religious background. Also the social layers of society are well presented.
Would St Louis' PAN be decreased to 30, our diversity would be jeopardized as
a PAN of 30 would not be able to cover local (catholic) demand. [NM28*]
 The current mix of children is made up of both Catholics and non-Catholics
whose parents choose for their child to have a faith based education offered at
St Louis. If you reduce this intake by one third, these children will be denied the
faith-based education they should be entitled to. [NM32*]
 We chose St Louis for our children, not only because we are Catholic and we
wanted them to experience faith based education, but we felt strongly that we
wanted our children to experience a school with a diverse social mix. St Louis
welcomes children from all backgrounds - which in essence is the heart of the
school. [NM58*]
 We also sincerely believe that if the proposal for a PAN of only 30 goes ahead
it will reduce the amount of diversity available to the area, especially as St
Louis is the only faith-based School in Newmarket. [NM63*]
 The proposed reduction in numbers would mean that there would not even be
adequate places for the Catholic children wishing to attend, and would mean
the religious diversity of the education within the school would suffer as a
result. [NM68*]
 St Louis School is the only school offering a Catholic faith-based education in
Newmarket. Surely by reducing its numbers you are reducing the diversity of
provision. [NM69*]
 The parents who choose to send their children to St Louis do so because they
like the school and its ofsted report. I am not in Newmarket as you can see I
am closer to Mildenhall, but I choose to take my children to this school. You are
taking away a parents choice and that is unacceptable. [NM76*]
 One of the objectives within the restructuring process is to preserve diversity of
provision. As St Louis RCP is the only school offering a Catholic faith-based
education in Newmarket, how can reducing its size possibly meet with the
objective? Moreover, as mentioned above, reducing its size will also impinge
upon the diversity of provision in Bury St Edmunds. [NM100*]
 Education and schools are not just about numbers of pupils and buildings.
Reducing the PAN to 30 would affect parental choice and significantly reduce
the diversity of provision. Maintaining diversity of provision is one of the
priorities identified in the S.O.R. It is my experience that Catholic families, as
well as those of other denominations and faiths value a Catholic faith based
education and St Louis Primary is the only school in the Newmarket area
offering this. [NM114*]
 We have huge diversity in terms of culture. People want a faith school, we even
have a Muslim child here! [Comments from Staff/Governor consultation
meeting*]
 If we go to PAN 30 the school would be all Catholic (which is against the
government advice for 20% non-Catholic children) my children wouldn’t be
allowed here and that is non-Catholic and non-Christian. How can PAN 30
allow people to spread the Catholic/Christian ethos? How can that be allowed
to disappear? [Comments from public consultation meeting*]
 Government guidelines are to encourage faith schools and new ones are
opening around the country. If this were a Muslim, Sikh or Jewish school,
would you consider reducing the PAN? [Comments from public consultation
meeting*]
There was concern that the changes would cause a reduction in standards across
the area as there would be fewer places at a successful school.
 One of your aims is about creating good citizens and giving every child the
opportunity to reach its potential. St Louis and the Church are the cornerstones
of a sizeable part of Newmarket, do you have any idea how many good citizens
of Newmarket benefited from a St Louis start? And just how well does the
school do academically? You can't seriously consider restricting the intake of
this school, you would be restricting kids ability to reach their potential. [NM66*]
 Schools with the ethos and excellent results like St Louis need to be nurtured
and developed not subjected to unnecessary downsizing. [NM62*]
 If St Louis takes children from other schools in Newmarket it means the parents
who live near these schools are not happy with them. For example I know
plenty of parents who live in the catchment area of Holdsworth [sic] Valley
School who would do anything in their power not to send their children to that
school. So they apply to other schools not just St Louis. Maybe you should
spend more time improving them rather than punishing the schools that are
doing well. [NM76*]
 It is demonstrably NOT in pupils best interests to reduce the number of children
that benefit from the proven performance of [St Louis]. If as stated our children
are singularly the most important factor in this decision, we must build upon the
success and performance of this school. Option A does not do this, indeed it
rewards the consistent failure of other schools in the area. [NM110*]
 While the arguments concerning numbers at each school are well thought out
and logical, I think that parental choice of Newmarket parents has been
overlooked. Two of the most popular schools in Newmarket are Paddocks and
St Louis. One of these schools may be faced with closure and one with
reduced entry (it would seem unfair to blame one on the other) [NM60*]
 Option 1 is penalising the success of this school. Why reduce the size of a
school that is working? You have said that the Catholic pyramid performs well.
You build on success – not decimate it. There is a lot of backing here.
There were no concerns about mixed-age teaching at the school.
 We fail to understand the argument about mixing year groups - this has worked
for many years, and offers social and academic benefits for both the younger
and older children.
NM68
 Mixed year groups have been common in St Louis for many years and there is
no suggestion that these do not work well and in fact we know that they can
add value to the education children receive [NM72*]
 A PAN of 45 allows for flexibility in class groupings as we focus on
personalising learning and individual children's needs rather than just simply
grouping children by birth dates linked to academic years. [NM114*]
 Because St Louis has operated at a PAN of 36/45 for a number of years we
have had to plan for mixed age classes and have learned to do it rather well.
We understand what we need to make it work for the children and the teachers
and have the staffing, class base and curriculum models in place to make it
work. We have been operating a two year rolling curriculum programme for
more than ten years and organise our PPA so that teachers can plan together.
We are well staffed so although we operate classes of 30 throughout the
school the perception when walking around the school is of small group
teaching. Within adjacent year groups we organise the grouping of children in
different ways depending on what the learning focus is in any one session.
[NM156*]
 Why is PAN 45 not as good as PAN 30 or 60? Managing 45 is not difficult –we
get good results and have a good Ofsted. [Comments from Staff/Governor
 My son is in a large class, but for (for example) literacy work he is in a group of
20. Are you aware of the reality of teaching in this school? How much time do
you spend in schools? Do you observe and know how they work? [Comments
from public consultation meeting*]
Need for Places
There were concerns that the PAN reduction will mean there are not enough places
for Catholic children
 The school and Parish have strong evidence that the number of Catholic
children expected to apply to St Louis school in the next few years will not fall
and may in fact rise. Many Catholic families have stated quite clearly that they
will find a Catholic school outside the area if St Louis is unable to offer the
number of places required Restricting admissions to St Louis is unlikely to
result in the filling of empty places in other local schools as the County Council
clearly plans. [NM72*]
 you have only just increased the intake to 45 from 36 as St Louis was over
subscribed each year. Now you wish to reduce this to below the previous in
take when it is such a popular school. The 30 intake would have to turn away
Catholic children as well as the children that parents wish for to have a faithbased education like ourselves [NM76*]
 St Louis's School is the only Catholic Primary School in Newmarket with a
considerably larger catchment area than Newmarket itself. The population of
this catchment area is increasing as new housing springs up, the Red Lodge
development area is one example. I believe St Louis School is already
oversubscribed and I fail to see how reducing the numbers can uphold the
tenet of freedom of religious choice for Catholic parents in the rapidly growing
catchment area. [NM80*]
 A faith based education is extremely important to us. Option A will see intake
shrink to easily below the number of children christened in the parish per
annum. It is therefore proven to be not workable. [NM110*]
 reducing admission numbers from 45 to 30 pupils per year [...] would, without
doubt, result in the school being unable to offer a school place to every child of
practicing Catholics who request admission. St Louis exists to serve the needs
of the Catholic parish and limiting its ability to do this is not acceptable [NM72*]
 Your proposal to reduce the PAN of St Louis to 30 seriously impacts on the
Catholic community in Western Suffolk. Parents have a statutory right to
access Catholic education. We must respect the wishes of Catholic parents to
exercise this right of choice in favour of St Louis. Data shows clearly that 30
places would be insufficient to satisfy the demand. [NM165*]
 In all bar one of the past 10 years, more than 30 baptised Catholics have
applied for admission to the school. In fact the ratio of baptisms to school
admissions over the years 1995-2008 has averaged slightly over 80% of the
children baptised in Newmarket (the number and proportion from Mildenhall are
much smaller and erratic). The latest data show that the number of Catholic
baptisms in the years 2004-8 (for admission 2009-13) has risen by almost 20%.
We anticipate that around 37 Catholics will seek admission in each of the years
(to 2013) for which we can make projections. This in itself should make it clear
that a PAN of 30 would be wholly inappropriate. [NM156*]
 Some Catholic children won’t get a Catholic education if the changes were to
occur. Can you confirm this? What about Catholic children who are refused a
place and have nowhere to go? [Comments from public consultation meeting*]
 The numbers show that there is significant demand for places at St Louis,
especially from Catholics. What is the council policy towards providing Catholic
places? [Comments from public consultation meeting*]
Most parents stated that if they could not get their children into St Louis they would
send them outside Newmarket for their education.
 At the moment 167 children are attending St Louis of which 51% are from
Newmarket, 49% are from surrounding villages and Cambridgeshire of which
90% are Catholic or Christian. If our children cannot attend St Louis because of
its reduced PAN we would look further afield and therefore not necessarily
choose another Newmarket school. [NM28*]
 There is also the misjudgement that by denying children places at St Louis, this
will effectively 'fill the gap' in the other Newmarket schools that are currently
undersubscribed. We would certainly not choose to do this, and if St Louis
were not an option to us we would travel further afield to Bury St Edmunds or
Cambridge to find the kind of Catholic education we want for our children.
[NM68*]
 We appreciate Suffolk County Council have a problem with poor uptake of
available primary school spaces in Newmarket but we fail to see how reducing
the number of places at St. Louis will guarantee the surplus places will be filled.
As a result of attending the public consultation meeting at St. Louis on the 22nd
October we learnt that 50% of St. Louis annual intake is much like us and do
not live in the immediate Newmarket area. This means, that if our children do
not obtain places at St Louis, we would not be prepared to travel to a school
that does not provide a Catholic, faith based, education. It is already the case
that parents feel strongly enough to travel to take their children to a Catholic
school. This would suggest that parents with children who do live in the
Newmarket area and do not obtain places for their children at St. Louis, as a
result of the down sizing, would also be prepared to travel to a Catholic school
rather than settle for a non-Catholic school in their immediate area. [NM73*]
 As far as numbers are concerned the calculations do not appear to have taken
into account the fact that St. Louis Primary is not a school which solely serves
Newmarket. It is rather like St. Louis Catholic Middle, which although situated
in Bury St Edmunds serves a much wider area. In addition to those children
living in Newmarket who attend St Louis Primary, approximately half the
children who attend the school, come from surrounding villages and Mildenhall;
therefore if the PAN was reduced by 15, to 30 & children were denied, places
at St. Louis Primary they would not necessarily go to another Newmarket
school, which therefore would not make a particular impact on surplus places in
Newmarket. [NM114*]
 The School and Governing Body have clearly demonstrated to you that while
St Louis may be physically situated within Newmarket, it also draws its pupils
from Mildenhall and many surrounding areas. In fact, 50% of its pupils travel
from outside Newmarket. A large percentage of the children continue their
education in Bury through the Catholic pyramid of St Louis Middle and St
Benedict’s Upper School. A proposal to reduce the PAN to 30 could have a
knock-on effect on the pupil numbers at St Benedict’s Upper School, one of
Suffolk’s “outstanding” schools. St Louis Newmarket is an active player in its
local cluster of schools but, in fact, must also be recognised as a member of
this Catholic pyramid of schools. [NM165*]
 If children did not go to this school they would not boost the other Newmarket
schools as many of our children come from outside Newmarket. [Comments
 My children are an example of why your idea that children not going here will
stay in Newmarket is wrong. We don’t live in Newmarket. If I couldn’t go here,
I wouldn’t go to another Newmarket school. There will be 100 more people like
me. [Comments from staff/governor consultation meeting*]
 I live in Fordham, Cambs - outside the catchment area - and send my children
through the Catholic pyramid. They were lucky to get in. If they couldn’t go, I
would send them to Catholic schools in Bury St Edmunds or Cambridge. I want
them to go to a Catholic school. The school is here to serve the parish, not just
Newmarket. [Comments from public consultation meeting*]
There were concerns that reducing the PAN would be harmful to the Catholic
community as the school is an integral part of that community.
 I am astonished that your bullet points giving the rationale for reducing the
intake at St Louis does not mention consideration of the needs of the Catholic
community of Newmarket. It is a fact that at as Catholic school St Louis is
different from the other schools and unless there is a policy by stealth to disarm
the concept of Catholic faith schools in Suffolk, this aspect should be
proportionately considered. [NM39*]
 What makes St Louis different from other schools in the area is that it is also at
the heart of the Catholic community at Newmarket. Parents, both Catholic and
non-Catholic, send their children to St Louis in order for them to learn the life
values taught there. As the school is always full it is clearly fulfilling a need, so
why deny so many future parents that choice? [NM90*]
 You will force Catholic families to travel further for a Catholic education, or
deny them a Catholic education. This is appalling. If younger siblings can’t go
to the same school as their older siblings, this will cause so much trouble.
There might also be an impact on the wider community.
 By reducing the intake number to 30 St Louis would not be able to reach out
and include the wider community to the same extent. [NM58*]
 We as parents of a child at St Louis feel that it is vital for the school to have a
PAN of 45. You have after all already agreed to this - and to therefore do a Uturn would be disastrous for the School, and we feel it goes greatly against the
promotion of community cohesion and harmony. [NM63*]
 To reduce the yearly intake at St Louis would, I feel, be a travesty, as this will
surely make it an exclusively Catholic school, which of course goes completely
against Catholic principles of reaching out to the wider community. This will do
nothing but isolate the school from the rest of the town and surrounding
villages, which can not be a positive move? [NM54*]
 St Louis has always been a real family school, where good Christian values are
key to its work. It would be very sad if the schools was no longer able to offer
places to all the Catholic families and families of other denominations who
value it so highly. [NM59*]
 But also the opportunity should be available to all the local Catholic kids and a
good number of non Catholics too. St Louis isn't about being exclusive, it's
inclusive; I and many other parents are non Catholic and we are made very
welcome and are actively involved. If you restrict St Louis' intake then you are
damaging parental choice which we believed was a key principle of this
government. Further if St Louis didn't exist, our son would go to a Catholic
school in Cambridge, not another Newmarket school. Allowing St Louis to
remain with PAN 45 has no detrimental effect on any other school in
Newmarket. It's the only Newmarket school providing a Catholic education.
[NM66*]
 By reducing admission numbers [at St Louis] you are in danger of damaging
this ethos of welcoming children from all backgrounds and sharing their culture
and teaching respect of the multi-cultural world we live in. [NM69*]
 If only 30 school places are available [at St Louis] each year, the school would
no longer be able to offer places to families of other denominations. The school
works to serve the whole community and offers a faith based primary education
to non Catholic families. This mix has proven benefits to both the school and to
the Catholic and the wider community. It has been greatly valued by countless
non Catholic families over many years. In addition, the restriction of a faith
school to children of that faith alone, is contravening the Government's
integration agreement with faith groups that up to 25% of children admitted to
faith schools are from outside their own religion. [NM72*]
 Apart from Catholic parents who wish their children to be educated in
accordance with their deepest held convictions and in conformity with their
conscience, parents from different faiths send their children to St Louis. They
do so secure in the knowledge that respect for all religious beliefs, or none, will
be taught, thus encouraging understanding and tolerance and hence
reinforcing goodwill in the community. [NM80*]
 In conclusion, I feel that any reduction in numbers to St Louis is inimical to faith
education generally, a microcosm of what could happen, the 'thin end of the
wedge. To destroy faith schools is one of the first acts of a Communist regime.
This eradicates religion quickly and efficiently from the country concerned. One
thinks of Russia, China, Cuba, Tibet. Nazi Germany seized all Jewish schools,
often razing them to the ground together with Synagogues. To reduce numbers
in a faith school, such as St Louis, is to undermine it and reduce its wholly
benign influence. Any correlation between Nazi Germany's education policy
and St Louis's reduction in numbers may appear ludicrous, yet all such acts,
seemingly insignificant in themselves, have larger repercussions, as you will be
well aware. [NM80*]
 St Louis not only serves Newmarket, but other towns and villages. It is not just
a Newmarket school but serves the wider community too and this should be
taken into consideration for PAN. [NM29*]
 Non Catholic children are fully integrated and receive a very good education
here – they choose to go with the faith, they turn out to be lovely children. They
complement each other. This is what the government wants to happen and is
good for all the children. [Comments from staff/governor consultation meeting*]
There were concerns that reducing the PAN would force the school to change their
admissions policy and only admit Catholic children, and even some of them would
not get places.
 Today [St Louis] have about 80% Catholics and 20% non Catholics, of that
20%, half are baptized Christian, therefore in total 90% are Christian. We would
never want to be exclusively Catholic as it goes against our ethos of loving,
respecting, spreading, understanding and sharing. [NM27*]
 St Louis' catchment currently consists of 50% of children from outside of
Newmarket's catchment. By reducing our admission numbers you will be
creating a ridiculous scenario whereby children of a Catholic faith will not have
access to a Catholic school education - there will not be enough provision.
[NM69*]
 I am very concerned about the proposal to reduce the PAN at St Louis RCP,
Newmarket. If the size of the school is reduced, this oversubscribed Catholic
school will have to turn away Catholic families. This in turn would mean that
the school would be unable to take children from other denominations or faiths.
This is one of the strengths of the Faith schools; exposing our children to
different religions and cultures is fundamental in ensuring they do not grow up
with the bigoted views so prevalent in society today. [NM100*]
 The core problem is that we are a Catholic school, serving a Catholic
community. In the last 5 years, 4 of them we have had more than 30 Catholic
children. Baptisms have been increasing and we are expecting 38 Catholic
children in admissions in the future. There are also Eastern Europeans coming
to the area, many of whom will want Catholic schooling. Catholic schools
should be more diverse – 45 PAN is just right to fulfil our core mission. I am
puzzled that we have to turn children away at the moment and yet you still want
the PAN down by a third. We will have to turn down a lot of Catholics (up to
35% if you include the 20% of non-Catholic children that DCSF guidelines say
we should admit) [Comments from staff/governor consultation meeting*]
 If our PAN is reduced and we cannot take all the Catholic children then that
would favour the middle class families who are able to change their lifestyle to
increase the chances of their children getting in. We are not that way; we don’t
want to be selective. How do you suggest we choose who goes where?
There could be situations where siblings would not be able to go to the same school.
 My son is in reception class at St Louis and I am really concerned that my two
other younger children potentially will not get a place at St Louis. [NM28*]
 The government prefers faith schools to have 20% of their intake to be from
outside the faith. If the intake number is reduced to 30, that would mean St
Louis would take only 24 Catholic children per year. As a parent with two
children already in the school, this worries me immensely - will my third child
get a place? If not, the upheaval would be horrendous. It would possibly mean
having to move all 3 children to a different school? It would come down to an
admissions criteria - what constitutes a fair criteria? [NM58*]
 If the PAN went back to being 30, The St Louis ethos, drawing from the wider
Catholic ethos, which is to welcome children from all backgrounds would mean
that as our second son (we are Church of England) wouldn't be able to get into
St Louis, despite his brother already being there, doing well and being
extremely academically successful. This is turn would mean that we would
have to withdraw our eldest son from St Louis because sending two children to
two -different schools is not achievable. We would forced to send our sons to
private school. [NM63*]
 I have 2 children and am fortunate to have my first here at PAN 45. A PAN of
30 will make it unlikely for my second child to get in. I would have to take my
first child out if the other doesn’t get in and go outside Newmarket. What would
you do in this situation? Reducing chances of parents getting siblings in?
The impact that reducing St Louis’ PAN would have on other Newmarket schools
was disputed.
 Concerning St Louis I believe that the Catholic school would be better
considered in a similar way to village schools. St Louis has no catchment area
in Newmarket and although we take children from the local area many of our
children come from surrounding villages and from Mildenhall( as this is not
served by a catholic primary school) . Taking these numbers into account we
would not take any more than 30 pupils from Newmarket. We would not
therefore be taking pupils from other Newmarket Primary Schools, if we kept
our pan above 30. [NM60*]
 It must also be highlighted that the majority of St Louis pupils move to Bury
schools when they leave. If the PAN is reduced this could have a very
detrimental effect on the Catholic High School. In fact if numbers of pupils are
reduced would it even be viable? This is a matter of grave importance to
myself as a mother of 4 children in the Catholic Pyramid in Bury St Edmunds.
[NM100*]
 St Louis takes children from a far wider area than just Newmarket. 50% come
from outside Newmarket. [Comments from staff/governor consultation
meeting*]
 About three quarters of the pupils are from Roman Catholic backgrounds. They
do not therefore go on to the Newmarket middle schools, and on to Newmarket
College, in the way that other Newmarket primary school pupils do. Currently
they overwhelmingly go to a Roman Catholic middle school in Bury St
Edmunds -and on to St Benedict's at an upper school level, again in Bury St
Edmunds. [NM173*]
 From this analysis, it is clear to us that St Louis is not a Newmarket school in
the same sense as the other schools, but rather a Catholic school serving a
much wider geographical area that just happens to be based in Newmarket.
Treating us like just any other Newmarket school, and setting our intake on
purely Newmarket needs, is unjustified and weakens our ability to serve our
broader community. [NM156*]
There were concerns that the proposals were reducing faith based education in the
area.
 St Louis is the most popular school of choice in Newmarket. As it is with an
intake of 45 - children get turned away. Surely to reduce the intake number to
30 means 15 more families turned away? As it is the only faith based school in
Newmarket - such a decrease in available places will limit parental choice and
result in a lot of discontented families [NM58*]
 The children who attend [St Louis] do so because their parents want them to
have a faith based education and they come from many areas, not just
Newmarket. [NM65*]
 An option not put forward in the School Organisation Review is the possibility of
allowing the St. Louis board of governors to run Exning Primary School, annual
intake 15, as a Catholic school. This would allow for, the removal of surplus
primary school places in Suffolk, no mixed aged year groups, the two tier
education requirement and a 30 pupil intake at St. Louis. The major argument
against such a proposal is that parents of children already at Exning Primary
school might not want their children in a Catholic school. Except, under the
Councils proposals, Catholic parents are being forced to educate their children
at non-Catholic schools and yet it is the Catholic School in the area which is
oversubscribed. This option should at least be up for public consultation to
gauge the opinions 'for' and 'against' this proposal. [NM73*]
 We are writing to express our concern at the proposal to lower the intake for St
Louis School Newmarket from 45 to 30 places. The government has been
quoted in the press as requiring faith schools to offer places to pupils from
outside their faith, but the proposal by Suffolk County Council will mean that
there will not even be sufficient places for the Catholic children. It is by no
means certain that the parents of these children will send them to schools in
the Newmarket area, and the school will still not be able to conform to the
government demands to take non faith pupils [NM84*]
 As St Louis is a voluntary aided school, does it fall under the same umbrella as
other schools? It cannot be treated in the same way as other schools.
SEN Provision
School Category
Funding and Land
There were no concerns about the potential of the school site to take the extra
children.
 The other argument for reducing [St Louis] numbers is that we are on a
constrained site, given that there are schools in inner cities with no green areas
and large numbers of pupils, I do not feel that this is a particularly valid point,
especially as we will have access to extra green areas for sports etc. The plans
that have been drawn up for the school to accommodate the extra children up
to year 6 will provide the necessary extra space needed. [NM65*]
 This leads to the Council's argument that St. Louis is not of adequate size to
cope with a 45 pupil annual intake. This argument is extremely weak as the
school has provided plans for increasing the number of classrooms without
encroaching on the outside activity areas. Having come from the London
suburb of Surbiton, which has an excellent record for primary school education,
both faith based and non-faith based, we do not agree that St. Louis has less
provision of space than the London suburbs. [NM73*]
 With our current (and preferred) PAN of 45, the expanded school (with years R6) would ultimately have 315 pupils. The DfES confined site minimum area for
this number of children is 4,075 sqm. The current school site would provide
170% of the permitted minimum size, and with the building works proposed by
LSI Architects taking the ground footprint from its current 667sqm up to just 900
sqm, the effect of the new building would be modest. Indeed, the
reconfiguration of the buildings on site would significantly improve the layout of
the site and would lead to considerably improved flow within the site. [NM156*]
 Additionally the school will be expanding its grounds through the lease of land
next door, belonging to a convent, and has ambitious plans to modernise and
extend the school's physical infrastructure. So space limitations will be
resolved. Indeed the school has already completed staffing and curriculum
planning to meeting the current PAN of 45 up to Year 6. [NM173*]
 The diocese did a feasibility study recently to see if the site could
accommodate a PAN of 45 and up to year 6. The recommended a two-storey
extension alongside the demolition of the gym hall. This will reduce the footprint
of the buildings. We have use of the Severalls land, and will soon also have
use of the pavilion. We are in discussion with the Sisters of St Louis about
renting some land off them. We have arrangements with other schools in the
town (Fairstead House School) to share facilities. With all this we can
accommodate extra pupils. [Comment from staff/governor consultation
meeting*]
There were questions about how any expansion would be funded.
 Where will any funding come from? [Comment from staff/governor consultation
meeting*]
Summary of Consultation Analysis – Scaltback Middle School
Location
Age Range
Maximum
number of
children
admitted in
each year
group
Year 5 –
Year 8
(Age 9 – 13)
100
(Number on
Roll Jan 08)
Number
on roll or if
full
Current
Elizabeth
Avenue,
Newmarket,
CB8 0DJ
Consultation
Proposal
School closes
-
-
-
Recommendation School closes
-
-
-
341
Staff
30
Governors
Public
10
42
Total
82
Why close this school when its results are so good?
Education will suffer due to loss of specialist facilities and teaching.
What will be done to help middle school staff?
(from Scaltback catchment respondents)
Well
48%
43%
44%
38%
Have you had……
Yes
66%
45%
Formal Governing Body response – no formal response received
- Headteacher of Scaltback Middle School [NM117*]
- National Union of Teachers [NM172*]
- National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers [NM141*]
- Forest Heath District Council [FHG30*]
Not Well
52%
57%
56%
62%
No
34%
55%
groups
There were many general comments about keeping the three-tier system in
Newmarket.
There were concerns that the closure of Scaltback Middle School would lead to a
reduction in standards.
 As a member of staff at Scaltback Middle School, with one of the highest
success of SATS levels I cannot see the need for change. [NP159*]
 The SATS results for Scaltback are outstanding. This school needs to be
maintained for its excellent results, not closed. There is enough pressure on
young people, without adding to their burden - "If it ain't broke, don't try and fix
it!" My eldest daughter has had a fantastic education at Scaltback and has
emerged as a very balanced, knowledgeable and responsible young lady.
[NP148*]
 Our results show that we have got successful students right through to Key
stage 3. Can we not explore using specialist provision in primary schools?
[Comments from governors consultation meeting*]
 NASUWT has not been convinced by the argument that by closing Middle
Schools it will raise the educational standards in Suffolk, in fact quite the
opposite. The closure program will cause huge disruption to pupils and staff
alike. There will be a requirement for temporary teaching accommodation; this
will inevitably lead to a destabilising environment for pupils to learn in and for
teachers to deliver high quality lessons. [NM141*]
As well as a loss of community spirit and extra-curricular activities.
 Whilst I do feel that a larger Upper School might allow for a broader curriculum,
my own children went through the 3 tier system currently operated in
Newmarket, and both would tell you that their experiences at Scaltback Middle
School were some of the best of their whole school lives. I'm not sure that had
they moved to a much larger school at the age of 11 that they would have
continued with some of the extra-curricular activities that they were involved
with in the close-knit community provided by the Middle School. I'm convinced
they both benefited from the specialist teaching they were exposed to once
they were pupils at the Middle School, which they probably wouldn't have had
were they in primary for another 2 years. [N102*]
 I strongly disagree with Suffolk County Council's proposal to close middle
schools in my area. Having recently attended an open evening at Scaltback
Middle School, I find my feelings reinforced. My family spent a very pleasant
evening being shown around by positive and enthusiastic children. A large
percentage of the pupils had willingly given up their evenings to do this,
demonstrating various activities that are taught at the school. All traditional
subjects were broached in an entertaining and proactive manner by imaginative
teachers and children clearly enjoyed their lessons. There were plenty of other
tempting extra curricular activities on offer too. [NP187*]
There were concerns about maintaining standards through the transition.
 I have nightmares about managing this school in the final year. The budget will
be reduced in the one year where we will need more support as teachers will
be off on training. We will be desperate for money at that point. If you want the
process to go smoothly, there has to be a safety net to ensure that the kids
have good teachers. [Comments from governors consultation meeting*]
 I am a teacher and parent. I have tracked pupils through to Key Stage 3. They
do well. I’ve got 2 children in Newmarket College. I suggest you look at the
changes that are taking place. It is getting a lot better. [Comments from public
Need for Places
There were no comments specifically relating to Need for Places
There were concerns about the loss of community facilities when the school is
closed.
 Why close Scaltback site when your booklet states that the sporting facilities
are an asset to the town? [NP73*]
 Scaltback is used by the community. Will the facilities be retained as such?
[Comments from All Saints Staff/Governor consultation meeting*]
 Scaltback have the Rugby Club using their site and many other organisations
and clubs. [NM85a*]
 you know the people here feel you are taking the heart out of the community.
There was support for retaining 3-tier provision in Newmarket
 It is clear that the proposals have been roundly rejected by the people of Forest
Heath. The NUT believes that the Authority's case has not been made, on
grounds of results and social benefit, to destroy the 2 Newmarket Middle
Schools which have worked hard to improve results at KS2 with success. The
view expressed in the public meetings highlighted the excellent results at both
Scaltback and St Felix at KS2. The parents expressed dismay that these
successful schools were to be closed, and the staff effectively made redundant,
and the children sent to a school which was seen as much less successful. We
share the parents' dismay. [NM172*]
 The plain fact is that the Middle Schools of the Forest Heath area are popular
with parents, staff and pupils and they wish to see these institutions retained.
[NM172*]
There were concerns about how transitions will be managed.
 I remember the huge leap from primary to secondary. The change at 11 is a
huge leap into adulthood instead of a gradual step. The middle schools smooth
the transition through childhood and that’s what you’ll lose. [Comments from
governors consultation meeting*]
SEN Provision
School Category
Funding and Land
Many people felt that the Scaltback site should continue to be used for schooling.
 Paddocks School […] could be merged with Laureate as geographically close
and put into Scaltback site less problems with parking. How can Scaltback not
be suitable for younger children? Already has year 5 & 6 so suitable for them.
The classrooms are all suitable plus hall and dining room. As agreed by your
panel has good sporting facilities an asset to the town why not use!! [NP73*]
 We are against merging any of the primary schools to make one larger school.
However, if this were to be an option to be investigated, it would make sense to
retain [the Scaltback] site as the facilities are already there. Surely, it cannot be
too difficult to reconfigure internally to make more suitable for whichever age
group. Would it also not be a better option to use this site as a 6th Form Site?
Thus retaining all facilities and essential sporting facilities for both the schools
and the community as a whole. [NM67*]
 My thoughts are that Scaltback School is a great location, and has facilities
present for years 5 and 6. Paddocks and Laureate Schools are poor sites and
Scaltback sits between them. Therefore, I would close these two schools and
resite as a NEW school on the Scaltback Site. [NM57*]
There were concerns about the availability and sources of funding.
 What about sales of land and the money from that? Are you relying on that?
 What guarantees do you have that we will still get the BSF £600 million?
Summary of Consultation Analysis – St Felix CEVC Middle School
Location
Age Range
Maximum
number of
children
admitted in
each year
group
Current
Fordham Road,
Newmarket,
CB8 7BE
Year 5 –
Year 8
(Age 9 – 13)
115
(Number on
Roll Jan 08)
Consultation
Proposal
School closes
-
-
-
Recommendation School closes
-
-
-
Number
on roll or if
full
372
Staff
36
Governors
Public
16
125
Total
177
There was strong support for maintaining 3-tier provision in Newmarket
Many people felt that the consultation process was flawed
(from St Felix catchment respondents)
Well
52%
50%
51%
35%
Have you had……
Yes
60%
45%
67 letters and emails were received commenting on St Felix, most of which were
opposed to closing the school early, and many were opposed to the loss of middle
schools.
25 questionnaires contained comments on St Felix. 15 of these were opposed to the
closure of middle schools.
There was a very strong desire for St Felix to not close early
 I am also astounded at the suggestion of closure of St Felix earlier than
anticipated because of the fire there. The SCC has shown a deep lack of
sensitivity and demonstrated how utterly out of touch it is with the townspeople
Not Well
48%
50%
49%
65%
No
40%
55%
and the community who have supported the school through extreme adversity.
[N8*]
 We strongly oppose the early closure for St. Felix and the abolition of the
middle school system. [NP96*]
 The Board expressed its opposition to the early closure of the school and
wishes to underline the Local Authority's documented commitment to take the
best of the Middle School practice into the two tier system. [FHG5*]
Formal Governing Body response – [NM119*]:
- Supported retaining the 3-tier system in Newmarket
- Perceived that the educational gains of changing to a 2-tier system were not
sufficient to justify the disruption
- Supported the idea of having a Church of England Secondary school on the
St Felix site
- Believed the SOR consultation process to be flawed and possibly illegal
 Church of England Diocesan Board of Education [FHG5*]
 National Union of Teachers [NM172*]
 National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers [NM141*]
 Forest Heath District Council [FHG30*]
 E-petition with 507 hits
 Letters & emails from local parents, residents, businesses and community
groups
There were concerns that the loss of middle schools would lead to a drop in
standards and poorer personal development.
 I benefitted enormously from going through a middle school. I am currently in
Year 11 and St Felix gave me the grounding and personal development to
enable me to make the transition to upper school that much easier. Please
keep the middle schools.....everyone i speak to says they played a big part in
their upbringing. My results here have been great, so thanks to St Felix I am
well on the way to achieving my potential. Keep the middle schools open!!!
[N109*]
 St Felix is a very successful school and has just attained its best ever SATS
results. It offers the social and personal development opportunity to its pupils
that is simply not available in a large secondary school. [N108*]
 NASUWT has not been convinced by the argument that by closing Middle
Schools it will raise the educational standards in Suffolk, in fact quite the
opposite. The closure program will cause huge disruption to pupils and staff
alike. There will be a requirement for temporary teaching accommodation; this
will inevitably lead to a destabilising environment for pupils to learn in and for
teachers to deliver high quality lessons. [NM141*]
And the loss of specialist facilities and teaching for years 5 and 6.
 we have chosen to send our daughters to St Felix despite a nine-mile journey
because middle schools offer such great advantages. Pupils in Years 5 and 6
benefit from having access to specialist facilities, in subjects including music,
art, science and sport. They are taught by teachers with specialist expertise
that would not be available in a primary school. Also, such schools are large
enough to allow pupils to be set for some subjects so that each pupil can learn
English and Maths, in particular, along with those of a similar ability. This
means that each can reach their full potential in a fully supported situation.
[NM13*]
 The specialist teaching available at the middle schools is extremely valuable.
My son was working to level 6 in maths in year 6 at St Felix. I do not believe
this would have happened had he been at Moulton School. My daughter
struggled with maths at Moulton School, but made great progress at St Felix,
with a specialist maths teacher. [NM47d*]
There were also concerns about the loss of diversity due to the closure of the school.
 It also concerns me greatly that the closure of St Felix would remove any
Church of England provision for pupils post 11 [NM1a*]
Need for Places
Some people felt there was sufficient demand to justify a Church of England
secondary school on the St Felix site.
 One thing I would like to say is I would like to see a church of England
secondary school on the St. Felix site. I would certainly send my children there
and i'm sure some or most of the parents sending their children to Bury etc
would rather have their children in town! You seem to be quite happy to double
the amount of children at the Newmarket College. Surely with both middle
schools closing there would be sufficient children to fill another secondary
school! [NP61*]
Wile others thought it was an ideal location for a new primary school.
 The fire at St Felix school in the summer of 2008 provides the County Council
with the opportunity to plan to meet the long term primary school needs of north
east Newmarket in a logical and sustainable manner. The school could be
rebuilt to provide a two or three form entry primary school which is well located
to both its existing catchment and Hatchfield Farm. [NM94*]
There were no comments specifically relating to Impact on Community and Travel
There were concerns that moving from a small primary to a large secondary would
be too great a step.
 They are lucky to be in an environment [St Felix Middle School] that allows
them to mature at a steady secure rate, instead of going to a larger two tier
school with much older children to intimidate (intentionally or not) them. [NM4*]
 Moving straight from my small village primary into Newmarket Upper School
would have had an adverse effect on both my happiness and education. St.
Felix was the perfect bridge between my primary and upper schools - an
appropriate size, with an appropriate range of ages. [NM70*]
Some people felt that there should be a Church of England secondary school in
Newmarket.
 We note with interest the possibility of a Church of England 11-16 secondary
school on the St Felix site. This is the first time that I had been aware of such a
proposal. We disagree totally that there would be a lack of interest for a second
secondary school in town. In fact we think competition is just what Newmarket
College needs to improve itself [NM67*]
 If SCC is unable to agree to retain Scaltback and St Felix as they are (which
would mean re-building St Felix with bricks and mortar), then why not consider
the option of an all through C of E school on the St Felix site? This could be a
4 - 13 school, (reception to year 8) which would allow pupils to enjoy an
excellent, purpose built school, separated into suitable age range learning units
that would prepare pupils to transfer to a high quality 14 to 19 learning
environment at Newmarket College. This is far more in keeping with current
educational thinking, than simply adopting a standard two tier system, with
many of its own flaws, which numerous schools are struggling to cope with on
a national level. [NM111*]
 As it is the policy of the Church of England to increase Church secondary
school provision and as St Felix, as a middle deemed secondary school, is the
only Church secondary school in Forest Heath, we decided to see whether we
could put together a business case for the replacement of the 9-13 school with
an 11-16 one on the same site (see E). In this we had the support not only of
our own diocese but of the Diocese of Ely as well. [NM119*]
 The Board has, as one of its strategic aims the extension of Church School
provision, and seeks to ensure that places lost, for example, through the
closure of a church Middle School, are 'made up' in the overall review process.
The Board confirms its commitment to church involvement in the Forest Heath
area where it acknowledges the likely loss of St Felix Middle School, and it will
continue to explore opportunities with both Mildenhall College and Newmarket
College. [FHG5*]
And strong support for retaining 3-tier provision in Newmarket
 Our preferred option is for continuation of the three tier system in Newmarket
regardless of what is decided for other parts of the county. We advocate it not
simply because our schools are popular but because they are successful and
offer diversity and choice. [NM119*]
 It is clear that the proposals have been roundly rejected by the people of Forest
Heath. The NUT believes that the Authority's case has not been made, on
grounds of results and social benefit, to destroy the 2 Newmarket Middle
Schools which have worked hard to improve results at KS2 with success. The
view expressed in the public meetings highlighted the excellent results at both
Scaltback and St Felix at KS2. The parents expressed dismay that these
successful schools were to be closed, and the staff effectively made redundant,
and the children sent to a school which was seen as much less successful. We
share the parents' dismay. [NM172*]
 The plain fact is that the Middle Schools of the Forest Heath area are popular
with parents, staff and pupils and they wish to see these institutions retained.
[NM172*]
The Diocese, however, supported the change to 2-tier
 The Board has been made fully aware of the strength of opposition in the
school and in the community regarding the proposal to move from a three to
two tier system, with the resultant effect of closing St Felix. While wishing to
support the school, not least in its particularly difficult situation since the fire,
the Board affirms its belief that there should be a move to a school system
which reflects the County Council principles set out in its decision following the
recommendations of the PDP in 2007. [FHG5*]
There were concerns that due to the different phases of the School Organisation
Review, choice of secondary school would be limited for some children
 Doing the changes in phases is going to give us NO choice where to send our
children as the only option will be Newmarket College! My eldest son will go
from St. Felix to a Bury high school, but my youngest falls into what I consider
the 'worst' year. He will do 2 years at St. Felix then I would want him to go to
Bury with his brother but no - we will have no option but Nkt College, which
maybe you should spend the money on to encourage people to send their
children - why does no one choose it over Bury? [NP58*]
Some people saw the benefits of children going to the secondary school at a younger
age.
 My son is St. Felix year 7. He’s seeing how 16 year olds behave. I think that’s
more positive for him than being his age at St. Felix being one of the older
ones. There are two sides to every coin. [Comments from Laureate governor
SEN Provision
School Category
Funding and Land
Some people felt that the St Felix site should be used to build a new school.
 The St Felix site is now available, but not available to sell to generate revenue
because it belongs to the Church. Would it not be the time to consider building
a brand new purpose built primary school on this site and selling off some of
the other sites to fund it? It is well located for the new housing development
between Fordham and Exning Roads, the other proposed housing
development sites up Fordham Road and Studlands. [N29*]
 Since places at the primary schools will be reduced, suggest building a new
primary school on site of St. Felix. This will also serve families in new housing
across from Tesco as well as pupils displaced from Exning, Laureate & St.
Louis. [NP130*]
There were concerns about the funding of the improvements to the schools.
 You 'expect' to hear that Forest Heath may have funding from 2009. What if it
does not? Also I have read that this funding is only available for secondary
schools. How do you propose to fund the many improvements that will be
needed to enable current First Schools to deliver the curriculum to years 5 and
6 at the level achieved by St. Felix and Scaltback? [NM40*]
Summary of Consultation Analysis – Newmarket College
Location
Current
Consultation
Proposal
Exning Road,
Newmarket,
CB8 0EB
Exning Road,
Newmarket,
CB8 0EB
Exning Road,
CB8 0EB
Age Range
Maximum
number of
children
admitted in
each year
group
Year 9 –
Year 11 (with
6th Form)
(Age 13 – 18)
Year 7 –
Year 11 (with
6th Form)
(Age 11 – 18)
Year 7 –
Year 11 (with
6th Form)
(Age 11 – 18)
Number on
roll or if full
442
(+151
6th Form)
210
(Number on
Roll Jan 08)
1050 (+6th
Form)
210
(Number if full)
1050 (+6th
Form)
210
(Number if full)
Staff
Governors
Public
18
12
Total
30
Accommodating years 7 & 8 at the college
Post 16 should stay part of Newmarket College
Concerns about timing & funding of works
(from Newmarket College catchment respondents unless otherwise stated)
Q3 - Comment on proposal for Newmarket College
Agreed
Disagreed
All respondents
50 (35%)
92 (65%)
Newmarket College catchment respondents
35 (34%)
68 (66%)
Well
Not Well
50%
50%
47%
53%
48%
52%
37%
63%
Have you had……
Yes
No
63%
37%
45%
55%
- The proposals for the college
- Retaining post-16 provision in the college
- Working in partnership with Mildenhall College of Technology
- Mildenhall College of Technology governing body [MB17*]
- National Union of Teachers [NM172*]
- National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers [NM141*]
groups
There were concerns that the standards at Newmarket College are low and sending
children there for two more years could harm their education.
 Newmarket College has got to improve before it can cope with more pupils.
[NP84*]
 The upper school is poor, quality of provision is poor. Teaching is barely
satisfactory. Behaviour is poor at the upper school. The expectation that our
children will have that school inflicted upon them for an additional two years
suggest you care more about standardisation than their education. If you intend
doing this your first priority should be ensuring the school is capable of offering
the standard of education our children deserve. [NP61*]
 The Newmarket College PAN is a complete travesty. HALF the planned intake
actually took up places the rest going to Bury St. Edmunds, Bottisham &
Soham I believe. The SOR should be concentrating on the disgraceful state of
the 14-18 education in Forest Heath and not tinkering with the middle & primary
schools the former of which still have it seems motivated & disciplined &
achieving students the longer we keep our children from Newmarket Upper the
better!! [NP167*]
 Children choose to go to schools in other towns as the reputation and results
are rubbish. Parents with children above average do not want to 'risk' sending
their children there! How on earth will changing to adding yr 5&6 improve
results it will be the same sort of children from the same families. We need to
encourage all those wealthy families in Newmarket to send their kids there to
improve the results. [NP73*]
Need for Places
There was general support for Newmarket only having one secondary school.
 I am very pleased that the possibility of a 11-16 secondary school on the site of
St. Felix has been ruled out. Neither that school nor Newmarket College would
be viable in that scenario. Newmarket College has excellent facilities and
plenty of space; indeed Y7 and 8 of St. Felix have very much enjoyed being at
Newmarket College this term, and we have enjoyed having them. [NP76*]
 We support the general principle that the optimum intake for a secondary
school is 6-10 forms of entry. At Newmarket College there has been a
significant investment in facilities and infrastructure. There is clearly the
potential to accommodate many of the additional students in the existing
buildings and the space to allow for the development of additional classroom
facilities to accommodate the PAN maximum of 1050 students in years 7-11.
[NM99*]
 The development of any other maintained secondary provision in Newmarket
would clearly have an adverse effect on the numbers of entry into Newmarket
College. A 3 or 4 form entry would call into question the viability of the College
and its long term future. [NM99*]
But some respondents felt that there was a need for an additional secondary.
 However we are very concerned about their secondary school move. This is
rather vague at the moment. I would be VERY concerned if there was indeed to
be only one option - Newmarket College - for all pupils in our area. This would
be a huge school and as such it is bound to be more difficult to nurture pupils,
have a relationship with them and effectively track their progress. It also means
that parents and pupils have no ability to choose a school best suited to them what option is there for parents who are not entirely happy? [NP49*]
Keeping the sixth form at the College was considered important as it would benefit
the community.
 Sixth form students provide leadership and role models at the heart of our
school and which impact on the wider community [NM99*]
 We recognise that the number one priority expressed at SOR stakeholder
meetings was for high quality post 16 provision within Forest Heath, centred on
Newmarket College and Mildenhall College and the desire that the provision be
high profile in order to encourage the aspirations of younger learners. The
economic and learner demands described by Grant Thornton are best met by
expansion, change and development of Sixth Form provision in partnership
between the existing schools and in collaboration with West Suffolk College,
cross-border providers and improved employer engagement. [MB17*]
There was concern that Newmarket College will become too big, with too large an
age range
 Newmarket College is too big - I would rather travel further for a smaller school.
[NP205*]
 If Newmarket College has 210 students/year, this produces a massive school. I
really do not think this is suitable for Newmarket: it is too large-scale for such a
small town. I am not at all convinced by your arguments that the College needs
to be so large to be viable. I think a second secondary school would be the
best solution - both schools would be of a size suitable for the town &
competition would drive up standards. [NP182*]
 I think that increasing the places per year to 210 for Newmarket College will
have too many pupils per class, also having years 7 & 8 there will distract the
year 11's & 6th form from their studies & final exam results. [NP45*]
 All except for the size of Newmarket College. It is going to be too large. The 6th
form should be catered for on an alternative site. To have children from 11 yrs 18 yrs+ is too much. [NP41*]
 Research shows that pupils in large secondary schools do not form such
productive relationships with their teachers, and this can adversely affect
behaviour and academic performance. [NM1a*]
 The Newmarket College would become a huge school as a result of your
proposed changes which could not replace the sense of community and caring
provided by our middle schools. [NM31*]
There was some support for the idea of a Church of England secondary school.
 I would like to see a Church of England secondary school on the St. Felix site. I
would certainly send my children there and I’m sure some or most of the
parents sending their children to Bury etc would rather have their children in
town! You seem to be quite happy to double the amount of children at the
Newmarket College. Surely with both middle schools closing there would be
sufficient children to fill another secondary school! I, like, many of my friends
will be considering sending our children to Bury in the future! [NP61*]
 We note with interest the possibility of a Church of England 11-16 secondary
school on the St Felix site. This is the first time that I had been aware of such a
proposal. We disagree totally that there would be a lack of interest for a second
secondary school in town. In fact we think competition is just what Newmarket
College needs to improve itself [NM67*]
The governing body is happy to work with the Church to explore possible roles.
 The future of governance at Newmarket College has been discussed and the
question of Foundation or Trust status has been raised. There may be a future
role for the church in the development of the governing body at the College
[NM99*]
There were concerns about young children having to mix with older children and
cope with a large school at a younger age.
 I also believe there will be a detrimental effect on children's social development
as 11 year olds mix in an environment of post16 education in an upper school.
child development is not just about what grades they get at GCSE and A
level!!! [N112*]
 On the other hand, neither do I think it conducive to smooth school transitions,
when 11 years olds move from a small primary school of around 100 (or in
some cases less) to larger secondary schools of up to 1200. [NM1a*]
There was a desire to keep post-16 provision at Newmarket College.
 My main concern now is to ensure that post-16 provision is retained at
Newmarket College. Our level 3 provision is very broad for the size of school,
and we are developing more shared provision with Mildenhall. We also intend
to increase level 2 provision in conjunction with local delivery partners. [NP76*]
 We need a sixth form available in Newmarket, having to travel outside of
Newmarket could deter many young people from staying on, especially if they
have to pay bus fares. Many parents are not in a position to pay for the
children's transport which means that children from poorer families could miss
out on further education. If you close or move the sixth form at Newmarket
College it will be a great loss to the community. [NM65*]
 We are concerned to emphasise the importance and viability of Post 16
provision at Newmarket College. There have been some significant recent
developments that we would like to highlight.
• Collaboration with Mildenhall College of Technology to extend provision and
ensure viability for level 2 and Level 3 courses to Post 16 students. As a
partnership we are working towards an integrated Sixth Form with a common
prospectus, a single application procedure and a convergent timetable. We
expect the improved offer and resources will lead to an increase in the overall
Post 16 recruitment, retention and performance for young people 16-19 in
Forest Heath. We are currently exchanging some students and staff to
enhance the Post 16 offer and the viability of teaching groups.
• We are ensuring that alongside the longer term planning in the partnership we
are taking steps to improve the Level 2 Post 16 provision at the College in
2009. There will be a Level 2 Sports course in addition to the existing Level 2
Business course offered to Post Sixth Form students.
• A key feature of the partnership with Mildenhall is the development of
specialised Diplomas. This will initially be for Construction and the Built
Environment in September 2009, with Environment and Land Based Studies
and possibly Society Health and Development and Sport and Active Leisure
available from the following year. All of these Diplomas will be available at both
Levels 2 & 3 to pre and post 16 students. This will increase the number of Post
16 students at Newmarket, particularly as a progression route for those
students taking a Level 1 or 2 Diploma at KS4.We should be able to offer some
Post 16 students Diploma qualifications from a wider West Suffolk provision.
• We recognise that the biggest impact on Sixth form recruitment is individual
success at KS4. Of course there can be no guarantee of improved KS4 results
but we have developed a wider and more appropriate curriculum pre 16 and
expect to see a greater degree of individual success at GCSE (and other)
courses and hence improved recruitment from September 2009. [NM99*]
 Much has been made of the small sixth-form numbers at Newmarket College.
The NUT believes that this will only change by Newmarket College offering
distinctive and innovative 14-19 programmes which will popular with students
living within reasonable travelling distance from Newmarket, and which are not
offered to the same standard elsewhere, with appropriate staffing and on-site
facilities to attract students to the town for those courses. We believe that the
College should concentrate on developing particularly good year 10 and year
11 facilities, for a selection of popular vocational Diploma specialist areas.
[NM172*]
SEN Provision
School Category
Funding and Land
There were concerns about the timing and funding of works to expand the college.
 all work at Newmarket College must take priority over other issues in the town.
[N57*]
 With all modifications planned for the buildings across the county, is the county
sure it has the resources to carry out all the work? [Comments from staff/gov
 What is the budget for all the work? What is the budget cost for the whole
programme? You are spending my taxpayer’s money – we have a ‘white
elephant’ going on here and some of us are worried. There should be an
announcement to inform the public of the total cost. [Comments from
 We also note the uncertain financial climate. This raises the possibility of a new
government coming into power before the date of the closure of these Middle
Schools. The Leader of the Opposition has announced that the Conservative
party, if they win the next election, will not be bound by the current
Government's public spending plans. This raises doubts over the security of
finance for "Building Schools for the Future" and the Primary Capital Building
programmes. [NM172*]
 The timing of the proposed reorganisation of schools in Suffolk does not link in
with the BSF program, and as such we are concerned that the funds will not be
available to ensure high quality provision for teaching and learning to take
place. [NM141*]
There were also concerns about how the two extra year groups would be
accommodated.
 2 sites for the college?! Scaltback is too far away for effective management of
the building in this way [NP132*]
 What consideration has been given as to how to accommodate years 7 and 8
on Newmarket College site? [Comments from staff/governor consultation
meeting*]

newmarket - Suffolk County Council

Transcription

Similar documents