1) A private organisation should not gain control of a state school.

2) They will appoint teachers and governors.

3) The new school will have a negative impact on the community.

4) They promise high results. What happens to the kids that do not make the grade? 

5) 37% or 247 pupils have special needs. 43 have statements. The new academy with only have to take 10%. What will happen to the rest?

6) The press release stated that the school will cater for 1000 pupils:

•     10% admitted by aptitude 

•     250 place sixth form

•     that only leaves 150 per year group 

This was later changed to 1250

Year group sizes are running at between 140 and 170. Will local kids be unable to attend due to lack of places?

7) Why no mention of primary attached to the academy?

8) All the local councilors that serve on governors seem to support the plan, without knowing what the plan is? How can they be acting in the best interests of our kids?

9) Worries about Christian fundamentalists running the school. Could our children be brain washed? 

10) Why was Northcliffe put in special measures? Results, attendance and percentage of pupils leaving without qualifications were all getting better. OFSTED said it was a good improving school in 2001.

CONCERNS ABOUT LACK OF CONSULTATION

• Little information about the project
• Local Councilors seem to support "the plan". What are they supporting?
•  

CONCERNS ABOUT ACADEMIES  

• As the constitution of the school's governing body stands, there is to be only one Parent governor representing the views of around 1250 families, one LEA representative, and five Vardy Foundation nominees. This "Board of Directors" will be intended to replace the 2 traditional, and much larger, Governing bodies. As this single parental representative probably will not be elected until after the school is up and running.
• The LEA must admit that they will have very little influence on what goes on in the school, and it appears from the make up of the Board, neither will parents.
• It seems the framework behind City Academies is ill conceived, as it hands over ownership and control of a school to a private or charitable organisation, in return for a relatively small pecuniary contribution. The rest is funded by the state, i.e. our taxes, so we should still have the same rights to voice our concerns and have them addressed as in a conventional school. This is not to say that other Academies won't work. Amey ,the sponsors of Unity Academy appear to have been "up front" about their motives from the start, and whatever you think about businesses running schools for profit, you have to respect them for that.
• There was also concern over proposals to change the length of the school day. Emanuel College students appear to have several extra hours per week at school, and this alone would explain their exam success. But what will this mean for our children? The existing pressure that older students are under often seems excessive as it is. They should be allowed some time of their own, or to spend with their families.
• Perhaps most worrying was the fact that the large proportion of children from "other faiths" could not realistically feel comfortable in a school whose ethos and teaching methods appeared to be outrageously Christian Fundamentalist in Nature.

CONCERNS ABOUT THE SPONSOR

• The teaching of Creationism as superior to Evolution in Science lessons. 
• We have conflicting reports as to whether the new school will follow patterns at Emmanuel like a compulsory GCSE Religious Education Examination, and a compulsory course in Philosophy, Theology and Ethics, at A Level.

• Some were not troubled by the idea of a Christian Fundamentalist outlook, but merely by the fact that this may jeopardise students examination chances.
• Others were worried that "Creationist" teaching and "Biblical Literalism" would give children an unrealistic view of the world.
• Some were outraged that a form of "brainwashing" may be taking place.
• There was an overwhelming feeling that the true nature and intentions of the Vardy Foundation had not been fully explained or made clear when the proposal was first made for them to part-fund the Academy, and during the time that the "consultation process" was taking place.

CONCERNS ABOUT FEEDER SCHOOLS

• Concerns regarding the ages to be taught by the academy, will it be an  11 to 18 academy or a 4 to 18 academy?

• Will Rowena or another school be knocked down for land to build the new academy on? 

CONCERNS ABOUT THE MAYOR/COUNCIL

• He stated that "I am determined to lead a serious debate and to explore all the possibilities" what other possibilities has/is he exploring?

• A Thorne Councilor said in the press that if they had known all of the facts before they agreed to the project then things may have been different. 

Please email us with your concerns and we will add them to the list.