Parents of pupils at Chillerton & Rookley Primary School have said they are ‘staying put’, refusing to allow their children to be transferred to Godshill Primary School.
Earlier this week the Isle of Wight Council revealed that it will have to work closely with parents to find alternative school placements following news that Chillerton & Rookley Primary will not have a qualified teacher come the New Year.
The news affects just 10 pupils across 3 year groups.
Parents are said to be refusing to work with the local authority, citing their rights under Section 9 of the Education Act which allows Pupils to be educated in accordance with parents’ wishes.
Earlier in 2022, the 170-year-old rural school achieved ‘good’ across all areas following an Ofsted inspection. This news came after the community successfully thwarted 2 council closure attempts.
Closure plans are yet to be submitted but the school land is protected by a covenant that states the land must be used for the purposes of a public elementary school and for no other purpose whatsoever.
A parent of a child at the school said:
“We absolutely must keep the school open. If it means staff training, promotions and moving around staff then it needs to be done.
Article continues below this advertisement “I know that my child will not be able to go to any other school as it will affect her mental health and to be honest she shouldn’t have to be pressured.”
A spokesperson for the Save our School campaign group has said:
“It is for families to decide on where their children are educated, not Council officers in Winchester. Parents at rural schools must be looking over their shoulders wondering who is next. We would like to understand exactly what the Council has done before ‘running out of options’. We would recommend reinstating provision on site for starters.”
Run by an Alliance council of secrets, out of control waste and disarray. When will the leader resign.
you know that
I remember reading that Councillor Andre had a rural schools strategy. So much for that!
They really shouldn’t be messing kids around like this during a school year. It’s poor from the council.
I think that the parents are taking the p**s.
It is also unhealthy for the poor children.
Also unhealthy for the poor tax payer.
A parent of a child at the school said…I know that my child will not be able to go to any other school as it will affect her mental health.
pff – I suggest you get your child used to changes, as they turn up on a regular basis throughout life – if your child cannot handle change now, then your child will absolutely fail as an adult. It is your job as a parent to teach your child the skills required to navigate change, engage with confusing situations and through a process of elimination , arrive at a solution, rather than blame everyone else for your own failings.
you might reference section 9 of the education act, but if there isn’t a teacher then there isn’t an option.
staff are not chess pieces to move to suit your needs
Mayb the child has additional needs or autism… So any change will affect the child
Then it should be in a special school where it won’t disrupt the education of normal children.
Good response.
Keep a whole school open for one individual.
So likely a drain on society forever more. As benefits will ensure it is fed warm in a home and cared for for life a disruption to its education will arguably have less detrimental effects on it compared to children who will have to pay their way in life
Remember that mental health has become the benefit claimants’new’ back ache. Being harder to prove and stigma removed the new scam for many now.
Children are not chess pieces either and they HAVE been moved to suit the authorities’ needs.
YOU pay for your own PRIVATE education for your children then.
Thought not. Can’t afford to? Well neither can WE council tax payers keep subsidising the ‘whims’ of those having children which WE fund.
Re-mortgage your home, get a loan, get another job and YOU pay for what YOU bred if you desire ‘individual’ attention or needs.
Sorry Rita, did I say I had children? Did I say I owned my own home? Did I say only had one job (or any job at all?) Did I say that I desire ‘individual’ attention or needs? No. I just don’t find it fair that children are moved along so the authorities can close another of our rural primary schools. There won’t be any left soon. Rest assured when they are all gone you won’t have to pay less council tax.
The reply was to your content of posting, not ‘individually’ to yourself.
You don’t think it’s fair children are moved along
Many others don’t think it’s fair if costly buildings are left under occupied but still costing the same huge sums to keep going
I love the Island, I hate to see the small schools being lost forever
But unless we bring in the ‘sort’ who rarely leave a womb empty, willing or not to be filled, then it is a better alternative imo to close schools than to have to ruin an area where people try to escape such
I do however totally agree with your last comment that the council tax will not drop at all if the school stays or goes
Goldring etc. will ensure their nests are well feathered for wielding the axe
There use of section ( of the education act is taken out of context, there is a lot more to the section which says that where LEA have made all reasonable steps then the parents wishes cannot take preference.
Keeping a school open for only 10 pupils is ridiculous, are the parents prepared to pay for the lighting and heating, upkeep of the building etc??? I think not!!! Who is going to teach them, are they going to pay to hire a teacher??? Obviously not.!
Of course it’s ridiculous to run a school for only 10 pupils, and that’s exactly what the authorities want everyone to say. But no one asks why the school has been systematically diminished over the last few years to reach such a situation. This is how most modern politics are played out, situations are purposely created to seem untenable and then the sheep insist on the very solution the authorities always wanted. Watch this space for a nice new development in Chillerton.
To Isle of wighter
Oh dear oh dear
– First of all a child is not referred too as a IT .
-Secondly saying a autistic child is not normal is a disgraceful comment .
-Maybe educate yourself on autism .
Wrong, for if the child WAS ‘normal’ then there ought to be no issue in relocating.
My assumption is, it is the parents, not the child who are ‘using’ the ‘disabled’ card to make others feel guilty, but, as we see, whilst authorities HAVE to pay such whims lip service, we can still speak the truth.
All of us no doubt genuinely feel for anyone with any genuine issues, but even IF that is the case, the world can’t change step for what in all honesty is just another ‘needy’ human.
We are struggling ourselves, without having to pander to those who in all likely hood will be a large drain on normal people and society for their entire life.
having autism isn’t normal, therefore the child would not be considered as normal by general society.
If it were normal to have autism, then the majority of society would have it and the world would be structured accordingly. Those that were not autistic would be seen as not normal.
your comments aren’t normal that’s for sure. and likely hurtful to some people.
Another modern ‘way’ to avoid the truth being told.
Say you, or others are soooo offended, and then hope the truth is removed or banned.
IF you have a disabled or mental health issue child, then others agreeing with the consultants findings should not be hurtful.
Many are fed up paying £2800+ per year on council tax and get nothing for it. So despite your umbrage, we like the many entitled recipients, are allowed an opinion.
LMFAO…….
But back to the subject in question.
When ALL these little schools were built,
there were no cars,
and the poor little urchans had to walk for miles in all weathers.
Now this has changed.
END OF DISCUSSION ! imo lol.