No, I don't have to take your word for anything, in point of fact I don't belive a word you say.

Nobody has to believe a word you say either.

However, it's really bad form to make allegations about people without being prepared to back those allegations up with some proof and stating publically that you don't believe a word that someone says is implying that they are a liar, which would quite logically upset most people.

If you're going to make this sort of sweeping statements about people then you need to understand that it won't make you or your views popular around these parts.

My first intervention was graves park

No it wasn't.

It was the (since deleted) Bradfield Parish Council thread.

Did anyone read the letters page of the Star tonight? A good letter from a rep of the Proposing group, but in true Harryarwen contradictory fashion, a letter was included from a person elsewhere in the city, totally having a go at families in the Wisewood catchment area. I find the attitude in this letter very poor for it speaks directly against any attempt to understand the views of some parents in the Wisewood community around the closure/merger of the school, claiming that their actions would disadvantage other kids around the city to fulfil their own selfish requests.

Now, those of you who have seen my regular postings on here will know that I am a parent of now 2 kids at Wisewood secondary from September and that I do support the development of a newly merged school on the Wood Lane site. They will also know that I am seeking council opinion around the "access to the school/figures in catchment" debate that has been of the upmost important on this thread 3.

However, what I will NOT support is someone from elsewhere in the city claiming that parents in Wisewood are being selfish just because they seek to maintain what for them is an local school of excellence (as you know, I believe that that excellence can be replicated in the new set up, but that's not part of this arguement). Sheffield 20 is Owlthorpe I beleive, in a totally different part of the city. I just wonder if people who write letters like this can imagine how they would react if their local school was to be announced as closing/merging with another?

Although I don't support the campaign that SOCS are running to keep Wisewood open, and I do support the newly merge school, I do vehemently oppose the public condemnation of those who want to fight for their community school - after all, I may not agree with you, but I agree whole heartedly with your democratic right to fight for what you believe in without being called "selfish"!!

Please provide a link to these letters from yesterday.

No that's patently not true.

When the libdems got elected they went to London and were told they could have the money for both schools, it was labour who then lobeyed the minister to change that position that amounted to blackmail as was reported in the Star.

Can you provide any evidence for that? The ex-labour council said all along that the government would not allow the funding to keep both schools open, hence their going ahead with the merger even though they must surely have known that it would cost them control of the council.

Now, those of you who have seen my regular postings on here will know that I am a parent of now 2 kids at Wisewood secondary from September and that I do support the development of a newly merged school on the Wood Lane site. They will also know that I am seeking council opinion around the "access to the school/figures in catchment" debate that has been of the upmost important on this thread 3.


Although I don't support the campaign that SOCS are running to keep Wisewood open, and I do support the newly merge school, I do vehemently oppose the public condemnation of those who want to fight for their community school - after all, I may not agree with you, but I agree whole heartedly with your democratic right to fight for what you believe in without being called "selfish"!!

Good post harry
But one point i have picked up on .im sure you have said on this forum before That you had 2 children who are already at wisewood secondary school already ( i could be wrong so im sorry if i am ill have alook )

EDIT- FOUND IT POST 181 BY HARRY
Of course I was at consultation meetings, both at my kids secondary and at their primary. I also asked qusations as did my partner. I am fully aware of the documetns that you refer to and have to say that the problem as always on thes threads is that certain members do not like poeple sticking up with an alternative view, particularly when they say they are in the Wisewood Secondary catchment area - I guess it sokmewhat dilutes the SOCS argument? Well, I am in the Wisewood secondary cathcment, my kids do go to Wisewood secodary (all of them now arctually) and I do fully support the new school on the Wood Lane site - there, I've said it - you can't therefore claim to have 100% of Wisewood catchment and feeders behind you because for me and my partner - we are for it! Sorry you don't like our opinion and will do anything to try and shut us up, but srory, not going away until the new school with its superb facilities, curriculum and teaching staff is there!

bUT you say in your other post your 2 children are going in secondary in SEPT -sorry just thought i would point this out
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Good post harry
But one point i have picked up on .im sure you have said on this forum before That you had 2 children who are already at wisewood secondary school already ( i could be wrong so im sorry if i am ill have alook )

Hi Masons, sorry for confusion. It doesn't read right does it? What I meant was in September I will have 2 kids left at Wisewood secondary not 3 as 1 has left now after completing Year 11. Hope that clarifies.

The facts are - I tell the truth about myself, Wolf:


Over to you Wolf, although this is really moving away from the subject - I know that some people on this thread just cannot accept that there are parents of kids in Wisewood who DO support the merger - sorry, but your views do NOT reflect everybody's- a lot admitedlly, but not all!! - and those of us who do support the merger will not go away quietly. Please be aware - this is not a thread that is a pro merger thread or a SOCS thread - it is a Forum - for debate - and that includes ensuring that views from all sides are tabled. :rolleyes:

You say some people on this thread just cant accept that there are parents in wisewood who do want the merger? Who are these people please?

I agree it is a debate for both sides as far as i know no-one has said other wise

Hi Masons, sorry for confusion. It doesn't read right does it? What I meant was in September I will have 2 kids left at Wisewood secondary not 3 as 1 has left now after completing Year 11. Hope that clarifies.

Ok you always pointed out you had only 2 children Just thought it sounded odd

Please provide a link to these letters from yesterday.

Hi Loopy - I've had a look at the Star website but it seems that it takes 2 days to get letters up on their archive. The latest letters on the site are from the Star published on Tuesday 5th August. Presumably then these letters from last night (6th August) will be on the site tomorrow? I will link then if they are there and post the link on this thread.

Ok you always pointed out you had only 2 children Just thought it sounded odd

4 kids actually but only 3 through Wisewood Secondary. 1 is grown up and married and schooled at Meadowhead - now there's another story!

You say some people on this thread just cant accept that there are parents in wisewood who do want the merger? Who are these people please?


I guess what I meant was that there are 2 sides to the arguement. You are right, nothing is achieved by stating thus. Let's keep good debate going though. Thanks for the reminder.

I guess what I meant was that there are 2 sides to the arguement. You are right, nothing is achieved by stating thus. Let's keep good debate going though. Thanks for the reminder.

Just thought i would ask i know your for the merger so have you been in contact with the proposing group?
Or even in contact with SOCS to put your views across as a concerned parent?

I myself have been in contact with both groups as a very concerned parent

Just thought i would ask i know your for the merger so have you been in contact with the proposing group?
Or even in contact with SOCS to put your views across as a concerned parent?

I myself have been in contact with both groups as a very concerned parent

Have clearly been and am in touch with those that support my opinion - in this case the proposing group or whatever iteration they currently are. Equally have been in touch with Ed Dept planning group as previously stated in terms of seeking some definitive info re their figures oft quoted here as an issue - AND ( excuse the shouting!) STILL no response! SOCS group - not sure why I would need to be in direct touch though? I have perceived SOCS as a group called "Save our Community School". As I am for a new school on the Wood Lane site, not sure why you think I would be in touch with SOCS therefore? - although - given the new political developments re this new school, I guess that things will move pretty quickly and that SOCS, Prop group, Lib Dems, and even Governors of both secondaries and feeder schools will need to work pretty quickly to deliver this new school by 2011? Who therefore do I need to contaqct in SOCS, Masons, in order to put my views across? I have had some pretty informal commnications in the past with a couple of members (Not sure I should name them after previous postings and the need NOT to ID people) - so I guess the answer to your direct question is YES - contact with the proposing group and NO - am not in direct daily contact with the SOCS group, other than perhaps enjoying some debate with any members that might be posting here on this thread.

Equally have been in touch with Ed Dept planning group as previously stated in terms of seeking some definitive info re their figures oft quoted here as an issue - AND ( excuse the shouting!) STILL no response!

Snap Arwen. I am trying to get the most up to date figures and I have asked for a bit more information and I havent got it yet. Ive gone to Andy Sangar but to give him his credit, he replied to say he's away for two weeks and will get onto this when he gets back. Who have you asked so far, could you PM me and I will ask the same people, do you have an email? Ive tried to phone but I end up round the houses then speaking to plebs so I would rather written requests.

(Lets have a race see who can get it first, lol).

PS/ I am also trying to get hold of the consultation document for the proposed change in catchment (which explained all the options and figures for the 3 options) along with the report to council following this consultation which went into detail of all responses, they recommendations and reasons why. Both these have been removed from the council website as far as I can see. If anyone has copies please let me know.

http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/Merger-school-head-in-quit.4371078.jp

Article in The Star.....there letters page hasnt been updated for ages though. Cant wait to see the letters that have been commented on.

.............. If anyone has copies please let me know.

Is this not it?

http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/index.asp?pgid=104701

Is this not it?

http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/index.asp?pgid=104701

I thought it would be too. But, the first 7 docs are just the minutes from public meetings so nothing about the consultation paper that was issued.

The post consultation document is just a letter from JCH to advise of a meeting.

The cabinet report front sheet is just that. No details.

The report on the outcome of consultation on a proposal to replace schools is about the merger, not the report on the outcome of consultation to change catchments.

The last one, just says cabinet report-amended, and I CANT OPEN THIS. It could be one Im looking for but my system will not open it.

I know a consultation paper was issued that detailed the 3 options and gave facts and figures for each one. I know that once the consultion was complete a report was issued that detailed all the responses and gave the officers recommendations and the reasons behind them. They were on the council site but I cannot find them anymore? Im hoping someone who been following this maybe kept them in their drive or something.

John Wilkinson, head at Myers for four years, has quit his job it says in the paper today. It's given very little space, so I was just wondering if this is old news and I am a bit behind?

Schools merger controversy headteacher quits his job (http://www.sheffieldtelegraph.co.uk/news/Schools-merger-controversy-headteacher-quits.4370247.jp)

It is old news, it was on the forum weeeks ago.

John Wilkinson, head at Myers for four years, has quit his job it says in the paper today. It's given very little space, so I was just wondering if this is old news and I am a bit behind?

Schools merger controversy headteacher quits his job (http://www.sheffieldtelegraph.co.uk/news/Schools-merger-controversy-headteacher-quits.4370247.jp)


A SHEFFIELD headteacher at the centre of the controversial merger between Myers Grove and Wisewood schools has resigned.
John Wilkinson, head at Myers for four years, had been a strong supporter of plans to create a new school on the Myers' Stannington site.

He was also a key member of the parents' proposing group - an official body set up to steer the merger through The before the opening of the new school in 2011.





So why has he quit? i mean if hes a strong supporter of the merger and is/was on the proposing group (conflict of interest) you would have thought he would want to see this thru .all sounds odd and not right to me:loopy::loopy:

Perhaps a proposing group member could shed some light to this please?

Have clearly been and am in touch with those that support my opinion - in this case the proposing group or whatever iteration they currently are. Equally have been in touch with Ed Dept planning group as previously stated in terms of seeking some definitive info re their figures oft quoted here as an issue - AND ( excuse the shouting!) STILL no response! SOCS group - not sure why I would need to be in direct touch though? I have perceived SOCS as a group called "Save our Community School". As I am for a new school on the Wood Lane site, not sure why you think I would be in touch with SOCS therefore? - although - given the new political developments re this new school, I guess that things will move pretty quickly and that SOCS, Prop group, Lib Dems, and even Governors of both secondaries and feeder schools will need to work pretty quickly to deliver this new school by 2011? Who therefore do I need to contaqct in SOCS, Masons, in order to put my views across? I have had some pretty informal commnications in the past with a couple of members (Not sure I should name them after previous postings and the need NOT to ID people) - so I guess the answer to your direct question is YES - contact with the proposing group and NO - am not in direct daily contact with the SOCS group, other than perhaps enjoying some debate with any members that might be posting here on this thread.

Sorry i just would have thought you would have got both sides of the story i.e from Proposing group and Socs?
The members you been in contact with Please P.M with who you talked to it may even have been me:hihi:

do still think it was very odd tho that you allways stated you was a parent with only 2 children , then you changed it:rolleyes:
Ill let others make there own minds up on that one.

do still think it was very odd tho that you allways stated you was a parent with only 2 children , then you changed it:rolleyes:
Ill let others make there own minds up on that one.

If you're accusing the poster of lying I suggest you apologise as that's not a very nice thing to do on an open forum.

If you're accusing the poster of lying I suggest you apologise as that's not a very nice thing to do on an open forum.

No i am not accusing anyone of lying i was just pointing out i thought it was odd!!!

I mean if you start off saying that your a parent of two children who are at wisewood secondary , Then state alot later in posts , That your children will be starting secondary in sept Just sounds abit odd! Then to change that and say they now have 4 children even more odd when clearly the poster pointed out all the time they only have two children!

So to make this clear im not saying anyone is lying!!! just it was odd!

If MAX you are saying i am lying then i would like you to apologise in the open -as this also is not very nice in a open forum
(like anyone on this forum members can make there own minds up on any posts on the forum)
But lets get back on the topic instead of accusing Members of this and that Please:thumbsup:

:rolleyes: do still think it was very odd tho that you allways stated you was a parent with only 2 children , then you changed it:rolleyes:
Ill let others make there own minds up on that one.

Really not sure why you are going for this one? My posts here have been clear about this throughout! I have never initimated that I have anyone moving up to Wisewood secondary in September - when I say starting in September, I have always meant starting again after the hols. My position is crystal clear - I had/have 3 kids gone/going through Wisewood secondary. 1 has now left. From my schooldays, 3-1=2, hence in September I will have 2 kids starting at Wisewood Secondary after the hols in their respective years - I think this is pretty clear and no one really needs to make their mind up about anything as this is factual. My other kid left Wisewood secondary and is at college now. My girl from first marriage lived other side of the city and therefore had nothing to do at all with Wisewood - so all my 3 kids over here have or are at Wisewood secondary. Fact. :rolleyes:

But lets get back on the topic instead of accusing Members of this and that Please:thumbsup:

But isn't that what you've just done to me - not sure of your motivation for doing so but hey! :o

Please provide a link to these letters from yesterday.

HI Loopy and all. The letters are now posted on the Star website - 3 of them, and can be accessed through:

http://www.thestar.co.uk/letters/Credit-to-all-at-a.4358445.jp

Hope it works!

If you're accusing the poster of lying I suggest you apologise as that's not a very nice thing to do on an open forum.

Thanks for your support Max. I'm bemused by whatever it is Masons is trying to say? :mad:

Sorry i just would have thought you would have got both sides of the story i.e from Proposing group and Socs?


As I've mentioned, I certainly have talked to members of the Proposing group. As I've mentioned before, up to recently the Chair of SOCS was a member of this group, so I guess I've equally talked to SOCS altho' did I talk to the Chair of SOCS as a SOCS rep or as a Proposing group rep? - hard to know given the dual roles held? So Yup, I do have both sides of the story altho' from same person??

The members you been in contact with Please P.M with who you talked to it may even have been me

Still not sure who you mean here? Members of Prop group? Members of SOCS? Parents from kids attending Wisewood secondary? Parents whose kids attend feeders for school on new Wood Lane site? Who is it that you want me to quote??

A SHEFFIELD headteacher at the centre of the controversial merger between Myers Grove and Wisewood schools has resigned.


Yawn yawn - old news! This was made public a few days before end of term and certainly kids and families at Myers, I am told by friends and other parents, were well aware of this. Not sure for motivation in the Star to release this yesterday, but looking through this weeks Star - loads of articles on kids doing this and that at various schools around the city - You wouldn't believe that they are all actually on a 6 week holiday would you? Must be a very slow news week.

Today's (Saturday's) news school articles in the Star include - Page 4 - Pupils pick up award - Sheffield High school pupils and staff travelled to London to pick up an award --- what, in the 6 weeks hols????? Page 7 - MP Speaks at prizegiving - Pupils from Asdell school in Broomhill welcomed Nick Clegg....... - what, again in school hols??? - Page 10 - Children enjoy pre-schools 40th anniversary celebrations...again in school hols??

Are we getting the point?? This about the Head at Myers is such old news now that it was not newsworthy. As has been pointed out, it has been on this Forum before and offers nothing to the debate about a new school on the Wood lane site.

After having a email From "Geoff" (not sure if i can put his email on here) The merger is back open PART 3!!!

so lets keep on topic and no threats and nothing personal please!!

Keep with the facts on the merger

Thanks all:)

If I could just point something out to anyone who may be in favour of the merger ... Malin Bridge Primary School is currently in special measures and has been given notice to improve by Sheffield LEA. The new school to replace Wisewood and Myers Grove will be an academy, meaning the Council will be powerless to intervene in the event of poor management. This is bad for kids if the school gets a bad headteacher, and bad for staff if the headteacher harrases them as they then have noone to complain to.

Snap Arwen. I am trying to get the most up to date figures and I have asked for a bit more information and I havent got it yet. Ive gone to Andy Sangar but to give him his credit, he replied to say he's away for two weeks and will get onto this when he gets back. Who have you asked so far, could you PM me and I will ask the same people.

Thanks Chavs. No need for a PM or email on this - I am quite happy to advise where it was suggested I write to - I wrote to the LEA planning Dept. I was initially told that a lady called Alena Prentice who was working on this new school on Wood Lane site orginally and then moved away, is back on the case. However, I was then led to understand that a member of her staff, a Mr. J. Hardwick, is dealing with advice re planning and figures in the whole of the North West of Sheffield. That's where my letter went so no mystery there. I do hope you win the race for info! We are off on hols for 2 weeks in next few days so won't be able to post a reply even if it drops through my door by then. Do the dept take school hols though? - could this be reason for lack of response to date? - just a thought.

:rolleyes:

Really not sure why you are going for this one? My posts here have been clear about this throughout! I have never initimated that I have anyone moving up to Wisewood secondary in September - when I say starting in September, I have always meant starting again after the hols. My position is crystal clear - I had/have 3 kids gone/going through Wisewood secondary. 1 has now left. From my schooldays, 3-1=2, hence in September I will have 2 kids starting at Wisewood Secondary after the hols in their respective years - I think this is pretty clear and no one really needs to make their mind up about anything as this is factual. My other kid left Wisewood secondary and is at college now. My girl from first marriage lived other side of the city and therefore had nothing to do at all with Wisewood - so all my 3 kids over here have or are at Wisewood secondary. Fact. :rolleyes:

Think you may need to double check your posts on what you have said before
hope this helps:)

Thanks for your support Max. I'm bemused by whatever it is Masons is trying to say? :mad:

Just saying it was odd!!! how you stated all along you ONLY had 2 children both at secondary thats all , then you changed like i say double check your posts:)

As I've mentioned, I certainly have talked to members of the Proposing group. As I've mentioned before, up to recently the Chair of SOCS was a member of this group, so I guess I've equally talked to SOCS altho' did I talk to the Chair of SOCS as a SOCS rep or as a Proposing group rep? - hard to know given the dual roles held? So Yup, I do have both sides of the story altho' from same person??

So you have not really talked to socs members ,

[QUOTE=masonsarmsfc;3891940]The members you been in contact with Please P.M with who you talked to it may even have been me QUOTE]

Still not sure who you mean here? Members of Prop group? Members of SOCS? Parents from kids attending Wisewood secondary? Parents whose kids attend feeders for school on new Wood Lane site? Who is it that you want me to quote??

Socs or proposing group double check post again:)

Yawn yawn - old news! This was made public a few days before end of term and certainly kids and families at Myers, I am told by friends and other parents, were well aware of this. Not sure for motivation in the Star to release this yesterday, but looking through this weeks Star - loads of articles on kids doing this and that at various schools around the city - You wouldn't believe that they are all actually on a 6 week holiday would you? Must be a very slow news week.

Today's (Saturday's) news school articles in the Star include - Page 4 - Pupils pick up award - Sheffield High school pupils and staff travelled to London to pick up an award --- what, in the 6 weeks hols????? Page 7 - MP Speaks at prizegiving - Pupils from Asdell school in Broomhill welcomed Nick Clegg....... - what, again in school hols??? - Page 10 - Children enjoy pre-schools 40th anniversary celebrations...again in school hols??

Are we getting the point?? This about the Head at Myers is such old news now that it was not newsworthy. As has been pointed out, it has been on this Forum before and offers nothing to the debate about a new school on the Wood lane site.

Yes old news to some but its good to let others get this info

I was told months ago that he had been sacked!! then i was told he took early retirement This was well before it was released by school letter to myers pupils or to teachers of myers;)
Now its in star that he resigned so its good to get the full picture from the star ,
i also think its odd as well as it reports in the star that he was thought that he would see the New merger thru and he is/was on the proposing group BUT now he has resigned
ive sent a email to the proposing group just to ask if he has resigned from them .

If I could just point something out to anyone who may be in favour of the merger ... Malin Bridge Primary School is currently in special measures and has been given notice to improve by Sheffield LEA. The new school to replace Wisewood and Myers Grove will be an academy, meaning the Council will be powerless to intervene in the event of poor management. This is bad for kids if the school gets a bad headteacher, and bad for staff if the headteacher harrases them as they then have noone to complain to.

Thanks for this greenrat:thumbsup:
I thought malin bridge was a good school,

very interesting post

Just saying it was odd!!! how you stated all along you ONLY had 2 children both at secondary thats all , then you changed like i say double check your posts:)

And like I've said, 3-1=2 ie 2 kids at secondary. No contradictions at all on any previous postings. Let's get back to the threads and real issues! :)

Mod: 2 previous threads have been closed due to nitpicking and bickering, unless people decide to have a constructive discussion about the schools and their future, then this one is likely to go the same way.

Thank you.

Mod: 2 previous threads have been closed due to nitpicking and bickering, unless people decide to have a constructive discussion about the schools and their future, then this one is likely to go the same way.

Thank you.

Thanks for reminder Moderator. I'm happy to stop replying to these personal comments and for others to stop them as well - no real need for them methinks as does little to further the dabate. Thanks again! :)

If I could just point something out to anyone who may be in favour of the merger ... Malin Bridge Primary School is currently in special measures and has been given notice to improve by Sheffield LEA. The new school to replace Wisewood and Myers Grove will be an academy, meaning the Council will be powerless to intervene in the event of poor management. This is bad for kids if the school gets a bad headteacher, and bad for staff if the headteacher harrases them as they then have noone to complain to.

Im sure ive seen in the paper that alot of academys did not do very well

This was a while back i think

Does anyone know when the planning for the new school starts?

Or even planning for the re-model for malin bridge areas? or is there any more news on this stupid bridge idea from loxley rd?

or is there any more news on this stupid bridge idea from loxley rd?

You mean the one thats rumoured to be planned for the kids to walk through the OAP development:loopy:. No, I havent heard anything but I wonder if all the residents are happy about the twice daily invasion planned through their quiet peaceful retreat?

If I could just point something out to anyone who may be in favour of the merger ... Malin Bridge Primary School is currently in special measures and has been given notice to improve by Sheffield LEA. The new school to replace Wisewood and Myers Grove will be an academy, meaning the Council will be powerless to intervene in the event of poor management. This is bad for kids if the school gets a bad headteacher, and bad for staff if the headteacher harrases them as they then have noone to complain to.


Is this true? I dont think it is. They received 'satisfactory' from the last ofsted inspection. Can you clarify. I've got a friend who's child starts there in Sept and is hearing bad things about the place.

Is this true? I dont think it is. They received 'satisfactory' from the last ofsted inspection. Can you clarify. I've got a friend who's child starts there in Sept and is hearing bad things about the place.

I always thought malin bridge was a good school

Does anyone know when the planning for the new school starts?

Or even planning for the re-model for malin bridge areas? or is there any more news on this stupid bridge idea from loxley rd?

Planning for the new school has been underway for ages, staff were aked for a wish list of ideas for the new school. I have seen three draft plans for it already.

Planning for the new school has been underway for ages, staff were aked for a wish list of ideas for the new school. I have seen three draft plans for it already.

Can you put a link on for the plans please dunney , i cant find any on council website

Is there any plans for Traffic as well please

These were just ideas, I dont think they will be on council website as yet. Sorry I havent seen anything about traffic.

If I could just point something out to anyone who may be in favour of the merger ... Malin Bridge Primary School is currently in special measures and has been given notice to improve by Sheffield LEA. The new school to replace Wisewood and Myers Grove will be an academy, meaning the Council will be powerless to intervene in the event of poor management. This is bad for kids if the school gets a bad headteacher, and bad for staff if the headteacher harrases them as they then have noone to complain to.

Have just checked out on the OFSTED website and this does NOT appear to be the case from OFSTED.

They visited Malin Bridge school in February 2008 with the report published in March 2008. Their overall finding was Grade 3 - Satisfactory. The introductory comments to the report state that "This is a satisfactory school that is improving and has some good features. It enjoys a strong reputation locally and is weel supported by parents......."
Individual gradings were:

Foundation stage 2 Good
Achievement and standards 3 Satisfactory
Personal development and well being 2 Good
Teaching and learning 3 Satisfactory
Curriculum and activities 3 Satisfactory
Care and guidance 2 Good
Leadership and Management 2 Good.

The summary at the end of the reports asks a number of questions of the OFSTED Inspector. 2 are listed here:

Does this school require special measures? answer NO
Does this school frequire a notice to improve? answer NO.

Would love to know therefore how it can be claimed to be in Special Measures? Thanks for reading - evidence is on the OFSTED website - just type in your local postcode to around 10 mile radius of primary school and you'll get a list that includes Malin Bridge.

If I could just point something out to anyone who may be in favour of the merger ... Malin Bridge Primary School is currently in special measures and has been given notice to improve by Sheffield LEA. The new school to replace Wisewood and Myers Grove will be an academy, meaning the Council will be powerless to intervene in the event of poor management. This is bad for kids if the school gets a bad headteacher, and bad for staff if the headteacher harrases them as they then have noone to complain to.

As far as the Ofsted report of Feb 2008. As outlined above.Malin Bridge is rated satisfactory, and rates slightly higher than Wisewood in the percentage points list.

Could you please post the link, that reports that the school is in "special measures".

These were just ideas, I dont think they will be on council website as yet. Sorry I havent seen anything about traffic.

ok dunney no problems

I do really think the foot bridge idea is a no no in my opinion

its been said before this would have to be over greenbelt land and im sure it would cost alot of money and this still would not solve the traffic problem

Are there any plans for school buses like those that Bradfield School have? Or maybe a walking bus to help with the busiest roads?

Are there any plans for school buses like those that Bradfield School have? Or maybe a walking bus to help with the busiest roads?

The only ideas i know of are The yellow busses (not sure where the money would come from for this)

The buses for bradfield school around 9 of them , cost around or near£250,000 a year -this would be tax payers money to take children from Myers and wisewood catchment areas
Still think the above has never really been looked into I.E catchment areas i know CHAVS has got alot to say about the catchment areas

The traffic around malin bridge is a big problem with so far no real answers from any group or sheffields Lib dems or labour

Tho it has been said by proposing group and labour that they now need more money for this new school:loopy: (not sure if the moneys for the school or the traffic etc)

Does anyone know why extra funds are needed??

Mod: 2 previous threads have been closed due to nitpicking and bickering, unless people decide to have a constructive discussion about the schools and their future, then this one is likely to go the same way.

Thank you.

Thanks Macbeth :thumbsup::thumbsup:

Now i hope we can get back on the topic;)

Planning for the new school has been underway for ages, staff were aked for a wish list of ideas for the new school. I have seen three draft plans for it already.

Is this staff of both schools i.e wisewood and myers ?

Ill ask some of the teachers im in contact with to see if they can relay these ideas to me.

I dont know if the staff at wisewood were asked about the wish list. Myers were asked about it. I saw the draft plans in in the photocopying room so I saw these unofficially.

As a neutral here, I'm a bit out of the loop on this now and I bet a lot of people are equally confused. I wonder if someone could clarify without biting my head off.

Is it no longer possible to support what was the Lib Dems' position, which was that they supported keeping Wisewood open but this did not mean they refused support for a new building at Myers? Is it doublethink to support both??

It always seemed to me that they wanted to keep the two issues separate, which was what I agreed with. From what I've heard there seems to have been a bit of "spinning" going on, whereby people who don't want the merger have been depicted as "people who don't want a new school on the Myers site." Seems one of those classic examples of the logical fallacy, "if you are doubtful about X, you must therefore want Y, its diametric opposite."

If the situation has changed I will happily hear the new evidence.

Hi DanielBlythe

I think what you are asking is whether there is, or ever was, an option to keep Wisewood open and build a new school for Myers Grove. (Apologies if this isn't the point you were making).

Keeping both schools open was never going to be an option. Both are on the small side for secondary schools and projected population figures for the S6 area showed that both schools (from memory) were forecast to get smaller. (This has been challenged by SOCS who don't believe this to be the case.)

Small schools have many disadvantages including finding it hard to recruit the best staff, suffer from instability (e.g. if a particular subject teacher goes off sick they may the only subject teacher in that school). Small schools also find it harder to offer the widest possible curriculum choices for their pupils. If you know any secondary school teachers don't just take my word for it, ask them about the issues surrounding small schools.

In addition both schools currently only provide education for up to age 16 years. The new school will also have post-16 provision. This will be an advantage to all children in the NW area of the city as children across NW will be have an opportunity to access this.

The criteria for the BSF (Building Schools for the Future) funding was that the two small schools would need to be merged and a new school built. The consultation looked at building the new school on the Wisewood site (too small) and a third neutral site, but no suitable sites were available.

It would be uneconomic to rebuild both schools (e.g. two small schools so close to each other would incur double costs for dining rooms, library facilities, two heads, etc etc). Both schools are in a really bad state of repair (ironically Wisewood is worse than Myers Grove in terms of it's physical building). It is simply not possible to merely refurbish Wisewood, this would cost as much as a rebuild (figures quoted in one of the Council documents about this). Children and teachers would have to be rehoused for up to two years whilst any rebuild was carried out. There is no room to house students at Wisewood, in fact they would have to occupy temporary classrooms on the Myers Grove site.

My background is that I am a member of the Proposing Group and have got children who will be attending the new school when it opens. I will also be a governer for the new school.

I simply want my children (and others) to have the very best opportunity for their secondary school education. I feel really strongly that it is extremely unfair that children across other parts of the city have access to post-16 education at their secondary school. I also feel strongly that I shouldn't have to move my children to another so called 'better' area of the city just to access a good education.

Finally I have to say that I used to be really worried about my children attending Myers Grove having heard lots of rumours about how bad the school was. Now I have had an opportunity to visit the school, meet the teachers and governors and get to know the Head I am looking forward to my children going to the New School. There are lots of reasons why Myers has not done so well in the past, but is a school that is improving and is forecast to get their best GCSE results in recent years this summer.

Hi DanielBlythe

I think what you are asking is whether there is, or ever was, an option to keep Wisewood open and build a new school for Myers Grove. (Apologies if this isn't the point you were making).

Keeping both schools open was never going to be an option. Both are on the small side for secondary schools and projected population figures for the S6 area showed that both schools (from memory) were forecast to get smaller. (This has been challenged by SOCS who don't believe this to be the case.)

Small schools have many disadvantages including finding it hard to recruit the best staff, suffer from instability (e.g. if a particular subject teacher goes off sick they may the only subject teacher in that school). Small schools also find it harder to offer the widest possible curriculum choices for their pupils. If you know any secondary school teachers don't just take my word for it, ask them about the issues surrounding small schools.

In addition both schools currently only provide education for up to age 16 years. The new school will also have post-16 provision. This will be an advantage to all children in the NW area of the city as children across NW will be have an opportunity to access this.

The criteria for the BSF (Building Schools for the Future) funding was that the two small schools would need to be merged and a new school built. The consultation looked at building the new school on the Wisewood site (too small) and a third neutral site, but no suitable sites were available.

It would be uneconomic to rebuild both schools (e.g. two small schools so close to each other would incur double costs for dining rooms, library facilities, two heads, etc etc). Both schools are in a really bad state of repair (ironically Wisewood is worse than Myers Grove in terms of it's physical building). It is simply not possible to merely refurbish Wisewood, this would cost as much as a rebuild (figures quoted in one of the Council documents about this). Children and teachers would have to be rehoused for up to two years whilst any rebuild was carried out. There is no room to house students at Wisewood, in fact they would have to occupy temporary classrooms on the Myers Grove site.

My background is that I am a member of the Proposing Group and have got children who will be attending the new school when it opens. I will also be a governer for the new school.

I simply want my children (and others) to have the very best opportunity for their secondary school education. I feel really strongly that it is extremely unfair that children across other parts of the city have access to post-16 education at their secondary school. I also feel strongly that I shouldn't have to move my children to another so called 'better' area of the city just to access a good education.

Finally I have to say that I used to be really worried about my children attending Myers Grove having heard lots of rumours about how bad the school was. Now I have had an opportunity to visit the school, meet the teachers and governors and get to know the Head I am looking forward to my children going to the New School. There are lots of reasons why Myers has not done so well in the past, but is a school that is improving and is forecast to get their best GCSE results in recent years this summer.

A few points to make here That im sure a post by CHAVS put the figs on this thread about the so called falling rolls?

Wisewood is something like 10th best school in sheffield This seems very good education in my opinion and for my children?

Lets go back abit tho Myers used to be bigger than what it was ,(Upper school) indeed it also had Loxley College at the side of myers at one point post 16 , Not sure of the reasons for both leaving the site?

Loxley college had the room to be made bigger if it needed to happen but they chose to move away to owlerton (sheffield college) WHY?

its been stated by socs and the press and Lib dems i recall that the new school would not be big enuff for children in the catchment area, indeed im sure someone said on here that mobiles have been bought for use when the new school opens

I still find it very Strange that the head of myers RESIGNED if as you say Myers is inproving and indeed it stated in the star that he was expected he would see The merger thru ! the head is or was also on the proposing group , Why would he want to even think of resigning ???

The traffic problem has been stated over and over But there is no solution to the gridlock that is expected!!
Why are the proposing group asking for more money???
I urge yourself and PROPOSING group (who are a public group) to have a public meeting and answer questions !!!!

The proposing group Should be able to answer These and many other questions from parents??
so DMartin and proposing group lets get at least two public meetings one at wisewood and one at Myers a sort of question and answer time !!
Questions have been asked to the proposing group by email no responce!!
so please lets get this all out in the open for the public, parents, and children sake!!!!
If you like you can get back to me in PM, As you may know im a SOCS member

As a neutral here, I'm a bit out of the loop on this now and I bet a lot of people are equally confused. I wonder if someone could clarify without biting my head off.

Is it no longer possible to support what was the Lib Dems' position, which was that they supported keeping Wisewood open but this did not mean they refused support for a new building at Myers? Is it doublethink to support both??

It always seemed to me that they wanted to keep the two issues separate, which was what I agreed with. From what I've heard there seems to have been a bit of "spinning" going on, whereby people who don't want the merger have been depicted as "people who don't want a new school on the Myers site." Seems one of those classic examples of the logical fallacy, "if you are doubtful about X, you must therefore want Y, its diametric opposite."

If the situation has changed I will happily hear the new evidence.

SOCS have always stated they wanted a new school for MYERS and a refurb for wisewood This can or could be done
Refurbs are being done on alot of schools in england .

Also like to note the last lib dem leaflet (s6) a few weeks ago Was asking the public to sign a petition For no merger!

The criteria for the BSF (Building Schools for the Future) funding was that the two small schools would need to be merged and a new school built. The consultation looked at building the new school on the Wisewood site (too small) and a third neutral site, but no suitable sites were available.


The criteria was actually to remove surplus places - it was the old labour councils idea to close wisewood and myers and merge them together.

I will also be a governer for the new school.
How do you know?

How do you know?

Seems to me that some of the members of the proposing group are getting promotions - teacher from Wisewood now deputy head - headteacher of wisewood now headteacher of myers as well, and now governors from myers becoming governors of the new bigger school!!!

I think these people choose to believe the falling roles because that way they get a better job and bigger salary!!

Both are on the small side for secondary schools and projected population figures for the S6 area showed that both schools (from memory) were forecast to get smaller. (This has been challenged by SOCS who don't believe this to be the case.).

I dont know about the population figures for Sheffield 6 but I do know that there arent going to be enough places for the children in catchment for the new school. Please note, figures sourced/taken from Sheffield City Council Children and Young Peoples Service, Consultation Document, Public Consultation on a Proposal to Replace Myers Grove and Wisewood Secondary Schools with a new school, issued November 2006.

Age/Number of children/number expected to apply/oversubscribed by

10= 362, the council say 262 expected to apply to the school. 52 will not get a place
9=361, 261 expected to apply. 51 will not get a place
8=377, 273 expected to apply. 63 will not get a place
7=325, 235 expected to apply. 25 will not get a place
6=328, 237 expected to apply. 27 will not get a place
5=326, 236 expected to apply. 26 will not get a place
4=311, 225 expected to apply. 15 will not get a place
3=355, 257 expected to apply. 47 will not get a place
2=352, 255 expected to apply. 45 will not get a place
1=368, 266 expected to apply. 56 will not get a place

DMartin, as a member of the proposing group I wonder if you can answer a couple of questions for me.

The figures above all assume only 72/73% of parents will apply for a place at Myers. Im well aware that your PG aim is for this to be a flagship school that’s aiming to be the best in Sheffield. Do you think that expectation of 72/73% applications fit with your groups aims?

What are your views on the number of children that will not get a place? Do you feel that the decision was correct to leave catchment as it is? Where do you expect these children will get a place?

In addition both schools currently only provide education for up to age 16 years. The new school will also have post-16 provision. This will be an advantage to all children in the NW area of the city as children across NW will be have an opportunity to access this.

I agree with you on this one. I dont think anyone, anywhere has ever argued against post 16 provision. 100% behind this.

My background is that I am a member of the Proposing Group and have got children who will be attending the new school when it opens. I will also be a governer for the new school.

I simply want my children (and others) to have the very best opportunity for their secondary school education. I feel really strongly that it is extremely unfair that children across other parts of the city have access to post-16 education at their secondary school. I also feel strongly that I shouldn't have to move my children to another so called 'better' area of the city just to access a good education.

Very admirable post. Are you a parent governer? If so, are all governers just automatically be governers under the new school. Wont it then have too many?

As you "know" your children will be attending the new school I am guessing that you live in close proximity to the new school site, or that you know theres a larges expance of population further away from you? Do you have any comments for the parents of children living in Wadsley Park Village who will have very little chance of getting into this super school despite it being their catchment school? Do you also feel strongly that they also shouldnt have to move their children to another so called "better" area of the city just to access a good education? Where do you envisage they access a good education from?

If you read my post carefully I have never claimed to be a governor at Myers Grove. I am not a governor of any school at the moment. Once a governing body has been created for the new school I have been nominated to become a governor of that school.

Being a governor is an unpaid post, so I don't understand your comment about being paid extra. Governors give their time freely because they have an interest and committment to supporting schools and making a contribution to education.

You obviously have a right to hold different views to me about school numbers. This is not an issue that the Proposing Group have any control over. If you need to clarify any information about pupil numbers you would need to contact the Council. A good person to ask would be Joel Hardwick I think. If he doesn't have the information then I'm sure he could direct you to someone who could.

The Liberal Democrats have now stated that they will be working with the Proposing Group to support the new school.

If you read my post carefully I have never claimed to be a governor at Myers Grove. I am not a governor of any school at the moment. Once a governing body has been created for the new school I have been nominated to become a governor of that school.

Being a governor is an unpaid post, so I don't understand your comment about being paid extra. Governors give their time freely because they have an interest and committment to supporting schools and making a contribution to education.

You obviously have a right to hold different views to me about school numbers. This is not an issue that the Proposing Group have any control over. If you need to clarify any information about pupil numbers you would need to contact the Council. A good person to ask would be Joel Hardwick I think. If he doesn't have the information then I'm sure he could direct you to someone who could.

The Liberal Democrats have now stated that they will be working with the Proposing Group to support the new school.


Is this a repsonse to mine or Loopyluls post? Have you been nominated as a parent governor or other type?

This is a response to both your posts.

I will be a parent governor. The new school will have governors to represent both the present Wisewood and Myers Grove schools and for parents whose children are currently at the feeder primary schools.

If you have any concerns regarding catchment areas and numbers of pupils then you need to go the Council officers. The Proposing Group have a remit to develop the new school. We do not have any power or responsibility to choose/change catchment areas.

We work with the number of pupils that Council officers provide.

This is a response to both your posts.

I will be a parent governor. The new school will have governors to represent both the present Wisewood and Myers Grove schools and for parents whose children are currently at the feeder primary schools.

If you have any concerns regarding catchment areas and numbers of pupils then you need to go the Council officers. The Proposing Group have a remit to develop the new school. We do not have any power or responsibility to choose/change catchment areas.

We work with the number of pupils that Council officers provide.

If there is a space for a parent/governor Should this be Advertised to wisewood and myers parents?

Im sure its the proposing groups best interests to look more into The figs issue?

Again Is the x head of myers who resigned and did not see the merger thru still on the proposing group?

And Why wont Proposing group have a public meeting for all parents at wisewood and myers (question and answer time) ?

I also seem to recall lib dems stating the new school would not be big enuff are you listening to them or what Labour said?
After all they are now in charge of sheffield and not labour

Have you (proposing group) taken onboard anything sheffield lib dems council has said?

Hope you can help on my post DMartyn:)

This is a response to both your posts.

I will be a parent governor. The new school will have governors to represent both the present Wisewood and Myers Grove schools and for parents whose children are currently at the feeder primary schools.

If you have any concerns regarding catchment areas and numbers of pupils then you need to go the Council officers. The Proposing Group have a remit to develop the new school. We do not have any power or responsibility to choose/change catchment areas.

We work with the number of pupils that Council officers provide.

Thanks for clarifying. I thought parent governers were elected thats all. I was under the impression that currently Wisewood and Myers have parent governers and I was assuming that the new school would need less governers than there are currently so I guess I had assumed that the current ones would go into a pool/election. I am surprised that new ones are being nominated without election but like I said, I dont know the ins and outs.

My other questions were asking your "opinion". I know the PG are there to develop the new school only but I dont think the following will jeopodise that in any way:

The figures Ive previously quoted all assume only 72/73% of parents will apply for a place at Myers. Do you think that expectation of 72/73% applications fit with the PG's aims? I understand that Bradfield school is around the 87-89% mark. I would think that intake is something that a PG or governing body can answer questions on as that is a demonstration of the school and their performance as a governing body.

What are "your" views on the number of children that will not get a place? Do you feel that the decision was correct to leave catchment as it is? Where do you expect these excess children will get a place?

Do you have any comments for the parents of children living in Wadsley Park Village who will have very little chance of getting into this super school despite it being their catchment school? Do you also feel strongly that they also shouldnt have to move their children to another so called "better" area of the city just to access a good education? Where do you envisage they access a good education from? (I ask this question as before your view was that
you feel strongly that you shouldn't have to move your children to another so called 'better' area of the city just to access a good education so I wonder if you feel the same for others).

I do feel sorry for parents and children of Wadsley park Village as chavs states they and others will have little chance of getting into the new school!!!

I would like to hear other peoples views on this, A new school but with not enuff places for children in the catchment area?

Anouther thing i would like to add it was asked to Alena Prentice i recall about any rise in ethnic minorities in the catchment area she replied " there would be no increase in the NW area "
but the numbers of ethnic minorities is on the rise nation wide!! and add to this theres been a few so far moved into this Area so has this been included in the expected Pupil numbers for the new school? in my opinion NO!!

ive a feeling the new school will go ahead BUT ive also got a strong feeling that wisewood secondary will still be needed as a school .

What is the relevance of the comments about ethnic minority pupils?

What does this have to do with the debate about the new school?


Genuinely confused and would like to be enlightened.

What is the relevance of the comments about ethnic minority pupils?

What does this have to do with the debate about the new school?


Genuinely confused and would like to be enlightened.

I think it is to show that more and more children will be moving into the NW area e.g higher numbers in the catchment area, more pupils in the catchment area, school not big enough, and these ethnic minority pupils havent been included in the councils figures!!

Now would you like to kindly answer what has been asked of you, as you are a member of the proposing group it would be good if you could enlighten the public as a lot it seems the proposing group are doing is being kept secret. You cannot claim to be working for the communities involved if you cannot answer what is asked of you.

I wonder if SOCS could arrange a public meeting and invite the proposing group - if the proposing group did not turn up then they quite obviously wouldnt be working for the communities!!

I will bring this up at the next SOCS meeting.

Thanks for clarifying. I thought parent governers were elected thats all.
Parent governors are elected. It is my understanding that for a new school the LEA appoint a governing body until the new school starts to operate. At this time the governing body is dissolved and the normal process starts to appoint governors including election.

I therefore find it difficult for DMartin to state that they will be governor unless someone has made a promise they cannot keep.

What is the relevance of the comments about ethnic minority pupils?

What does this have to do with the debate about the new school?


Genuinely confused and would like to be enlightened.

Not sure if you have been reading the news on how teachers/schools cant cope with alot more ethnic minoritys coming into schools etc and that school are not big enuff

My point is these ethnic minoritys will have not been added to the FIGS on pupil numbers by council officers so in this respect as we know the school will not be big enuff for the catchment area now!! there could also be alot more children (minoritys) in the catchment than what the council officers first said!

Also lib dems did also say the new school would not be big enuff im thinking they got this imformation from council officers!!

So its not looking good on the proposing group if they are wanting to back a new school with not enuff places for children in its own catchment area
Hope thats answerd that

Had a conversation with someone from the sports gym on wisewood , they stated that lotto money would have to be payed back if the wisewood gym land was to be sold for housing (around 2.3 million) also they will be fighting to keep part of wisewood school site open im told!

Also i understand Wisewood tara are fighting to keep wisewood site for public use;):)

This can only be good news as im sure SOCS will fight with them to keep this site, as we all know this site may be needed in the future;);)

Thanks for the clarifications. I hope I didn't poke a semi-dormant hornets' nest.

I'm sure I remember reading that Paul Scriven had said the Lib Dems considered the two things - a refurbishment for Myers and keeping Wisewood open - as two totally separate issues. Maybe I'm wrong. Or maybe he did and has now changed his mind.

I only asked because from what I've read and heard there seems to be a bit of "spinning" going on, with those people in Wisewood who are (understandably) upset about the closure of their local school being portrayed as the bad guys, "the people who don't want a new school" - which seems like a subtly political piece of manoeuvring, but not necessarily one to be admired. That may end up being the result they unwittingly contribute to, but it's not why they started.

It's also interesting to read The Chavs' posts which continue to make it clear that the "falling numbers" issue is not as cut and dried as has been claimed.

I wonder how many Wisewooders will vote with their feet and try to get their children into the geographically nearer school (and the known quantity) which is of course Bradfield?

Thanks for the clarifications. I hope I didn't poke a semi-dormant hornets' nest.

I'm sure I remember reading that Paul Scriven had said the Lib Dems considered the two things - a refurbishment for Myers and keeping Wisewood open - as two totally separate issues. Maybe I'm wrong. Or maybe he did and has now changed his mind.

I only asked because from what I've read and heard there seems to be a bit of "spinning" going on, with those people in Wisewood who are (understandably) upset about the closure of their local school being portrayed as the bad guys, "the people who don't want a new school" - which seems like a subtly political piece of manoeuvring, but not necessarily one to be admired. That may end up being the result they unwittingly contribute to, but it's not why they started.

It's also interesting to read The Chavs' posts which continue to make it clear that the "falling numbers" issue is not as cut and dried as has been claimed.

I wonder how many Wisewooders will vote with their feet and try to get their children into the geographically nearer school (and the known quantity) which is of course Bradfield?

Bradfield school will be full but thats anouther problem,
The falling rolls that labour stated does not make any sense, as SOCS and parents pointed this out along time ago but labour did not want to know!

Theres alot of issues still not answerd in the merger and Labour council at the time did not want to answer these points , The proposing group also took the same stance and would not answer points on this merger!

but its always been clear in the last local elections what communities felt i.e stannington ,wisewood,hillsborough, walkley,loxley and labour admitted that they lost local labour seats because communities DID NOT want the merger
The proposing group should also have noted this and started fighting for what communities wanted . i never understood there stance on this issue as they claimed that ALL communities was behind them in there news letters, and this is how they got there public body group stating the same to labour government .

Info- this is when labour council was in power!!!!!!

The documents served on the Council also reveal that the information given to the Council meeting by officers, that the £250 million of central government investment allocated to Sheffield Secondary Schools would be put at risk if Wisewood was not closed is incorrect.

An email to SCC from Anthony Walker, Regional Director Education & Planning at Partnership for Schools, who are responsible for delivering the Government’s secondary school renewal programme, shows the money is not at risk and will be made available to the Council once all issues have been resolved to everyone’s satisfaction.

Do you know what the sad thing about all this school catchment / closure argument is?

Initially (me included)_ people from Stannington, Wharncliffe , Bradfield etc... did not help to fight to keep Wisewood open because they thought it didn't effect them. (me too!!!)

Unfortunately for us now abit of humble pie is in order as it looks highly likely that all schools and areas in s6 s36 will be effected.

Wadsley park will put Bradfield as a first choice regardless and i am sure they will be accomodated. As for the negative comments about the Marlcliffe parents...why shouldn't they be angry, they are in the Middle of Bradfield and Myers and quite rightly should have the option of either.

I think the other communities should now speak up and start fighting for the school to stay open, otherwise i'msure we will live to regret not!!


I do not have children but live in Wharncliffe and there is fear amongst the residents now!!!

Should have spoke up for Wisewood really shouldn't we!!
Lets try nd make a difference now:)

Do you know what the sad thing about all this school catchment / closure argument is?

Initially (me included)_ people from Stannington, Wharncliffe , Bradfield etc... did not help to fight to keep Wisewood open because they thought it didn't effect them. (me too!!!)

Unfortunately for us now abit of humble pie is in order as it looks highly likely that all schools and areas in s6 s36 will be effected.

Wadsley park will put Bradfield as a first choice regardless and i am sure they will be accomodated. As for the negative comments about the Marlcliffe parents...why shouldn't they be angry, they are in the Middle of Bradfield and Myers and quite rightly should have the option of either.

I think the other communities should now speak up and start fighting for the school to stay open, otherwise i'msure we will live to regret not!!


I do not have children but live in Wharncliffe and there is fear amongst the residents now!!!

Should have spoke up for Wisewood really shouldn't we!!
Lets try nd make a difference now:)

This is what SOCS has been saying all along but no-one would listen!!!

I think it was possibly a case of " well as long as they don't change our catchments then who cares what happens to the Marlcliffe and Wisewood Primary Children".
I do think alot of communities are being extreemly harsh about Wadsley Park residents, as i know myself we were not happy (initially) about the development, and i think that is still so in many peoples eyes. However they are innocent in the fact that they found a home and moved there. They were intially promised Bradfield as a catchment and it won't be long before this comes under fire again due to the fact that they do pay into Bradfield parish council, and would probably choose not to, but to be placed into Hillsborough for all being part of Bradfield has given them. So that is a storm in a teacup waiting to explode again!! And i imagine that the revenue created (however small) contributes to the up keep of areas in Wharncliffe, Bradfield etc... so i think we need to give these guys a break.

I live on the border of Wharncliffe, and i have heard residents up in arms about the possible outcomes to school catchments in the future. I tried pointing out that you can apply anywhere in Sheffield and since last year are no longer guarenteed your catchment area anyway!!

I think we can all agree that its a shambles (aside from the very mysterious proposal group???:loopy:) And i certainly think that we need to re-address
looking at petitioning to keep Wisewood open. I think most of WPV would be happy if it stayed open, however there are a considerable amount of children from that estate that attend Bradfield now so could they possibly get into Bradfield? i am sure they can and will still apply - however

I certainly have ate loads of Humble pie! but what you (socs) have to realise is that we were not told about any of this until it was way under way, and we were not asked our opinion until we kicked up a fuss.

Can we start a petition thread towards socs anywhere? or could you give us a link barmeyowls/Masons?

Also "chavs" i believe are for saving the school?? can you offer advice as to how the Wharncliffe , O/bridge and Bradfield communities can help. I also appeal to upper Stannington who were defiant in keeping their catchment, why not help Fight to keep Wisewood open to try and acheive you that??

Your catchments are not guarenteed if the schools merge, and nowhere will you find a full proof guarentee from anyone, it's always "we aim to" or "we certainly will try" "shouldn't effect" etc...etc... you mark my words, the catchments will start getting very interesting.

PM me with ideas or post on here please:)

I think it was possibly a case of " well as long as they don't change our catchments then who cares what happens to the Marlcliffe and Wisewood Primary Children".
I do think alot of communities are being extreemly harsh about Wadsley Park residents, as i know myself we were not happy (initially) about the development, and i think that is still so in many peoples eyes. However they are innocent in the fact that they found a home and moved there. They were intially promised Bradfield as a catchment and it won't be long before this comes under fire again due to the fact that they do pay into Bradfield parish council, and would probably choose not to, but to be placed into Hillsborough for all being part of Bradfield has given them. So that is a storm in a teacup waiting to explode again!! And i imagine that the revenue created (however small) contributes to the up keep of areas in Wharncliffe, Bradfield etc... so i think we need to give these guys a break.

I live on the border of Wharncliffe, and i have heard residents up in arms about the possible outcomes to school catchments in the future. I tried pointing out that you can apply anywhere in Sheffield and since last year are no longer guarenteed your catchment area anyway!!

I think we can all agree that its a shambles (aside from the very mysterious proposal group???:loopy:) And i certainly think that we need to re-address
looking at petitioning to keep Wisewood open. I think most of WPV would be happy if it stayed open, however there are a considerable amount of children from that estate that attend Bradfield now so could they possibly get into Bradfield? i am sure they can and will still apply - however

I certainly have ate loads of Humble pie! but what you (socs) have to realise is that we were not told about any of this until it was way under way, and we were not asked our opinion until we kicked up a fuss.

Can we start a petition thread towards socs anywhere? or could you give us a link barmeyowls/Masons?

Also "chavs" i believe are for saving the school?? can you offer advice as to how the Wharncliffe , O/bridge and Bradfield communities can help. I also appeal to upper Stannington who were defiant in keeping their catchment, why not help Fight to keep Wisewood open to try and acheive you that??

Your catchments are not guarenteed if the schools merge, and nowhere will you find a full proof guarentee from anyone, it's always "we aim to" or "we certainly will try" "shouldn't effect" etc...etc... you mark my words, the catchments will start getting very interesting.

PM me with ideas or post on here please:)

Great post:thumbsup:

these problems and many more are going unanswerd! I never could see how the labour council at the time and also the proposing group seem to not see the problems this merger will face- both have always been hell bent on pushing the merger thru and to hell to everyone else in my opinion!!!


ill try help as best i can P.M me!

Talks was said ages ago about abbydale closing , This stayed open!!

Ive now herd anouther school (secondary) will be closing or merging , a strong rumour for a while has been stocksbridge/bradfield merger - does anyone else hear about this?

Ive emailed my local councillor to ask if this is true!! (will they tell me ? or do they even have too)

This is a response to both your posts.

I will be a parent governor. The new school will have governors to represent both the present Wisewood and Myers Grove schools and for parents whose children are currently at the feeder primary schools.....

I have not been on this thread for a while and I was just reading through some of the recent comments. With apologies for referring to a comment a while ago, but could someone clarify how DMartin knows they will be a parent governor?

Parents can put their names forward to become governors, but they have to then be elected by other parents of the school. Does this not apply for the new school?

I have not been on this thread for a while and I was just reading through some of the recent comments. With apologies for referring to a comment a while ago, but could someone clarify how DMartin knows they will be a parent governor?

Parents can put their names forward to become governors, but they have to then be elected by other parents of the school. Does this not apply for the new school?

It does seem odd that Proposing group members , seem to be forcing there way as such as governors of the new school with out first being elected!!

Lets be honest Parents are been kept in the dark by the proposing group
A need for a public meeting is needed just to let parents know whats going on?

SOCS group lets get this public meeting sorted and lets get the proposing group invited!!!!! and ask them the questions needed

Talks was said ages ago about abbydale closing , This stayed open!!

Ive now herd anouther school (secondary) will be closing or merging , a strong rumour for a while has been stocksbridge/bradfield merger - does anyone else hear about this?

Ive emailed my local councillor (lib dems) to ask if this is true!! (will they tell me ? or do they even have too)

Local councillor got back to me and states to his knowledge , Theres NO stocksbridge/bradfield merger


But i do recall a long while before the myers merger i asked the local labour councillor the same question about wisewood and he stated the same answer:rolleyes:
Think we will have to wait and see

I think it was possibly a case of " well as long as they don't change our catchments then who cares what happens to the Marlcliffe and Wisewood Primary Children".
I do think alot of communities are being extreemly harsh about Wadsley Park residents, as i know myself we were not happy (initially) about the development, and i think that is still so in many peoples eyes. However they are innocent in the fact that they found a home and moved there. They were intially promised Bradfield as a catchment and it won't be long before this comes under fire again due to the fact that they do pay into Bradfield parish council, and would probably choose not to, but to be placed into Hillsborough for all being part of Bradfield has given them. So that is a storm in a teacup waiting to explode again!! And i imagine that the revenue created (however small) contributes to the up keep of areas in Wharncliffe, Bradfield etc... so i think we need to give these guys a break.

I live on the border of Wharncliffe, and i have heard residents up in arms about the possible outcomes to school catchments in the future. I tried pointing out that you can apply anywhere in Sheffield and since last year are no longer guarenteed your catchment area anyway!!

I think we can all agree that its a shambles (aside from the very mysterious proposal group???:loopy:) And i certainly think that we need to re-address
looking at petitioning to keep Wisewood open. I think most of WPV would be happy if it stayed open, however there are a considerable amount of children from that estate that attend Bradfield now so could they possibly get into Bradfield? i am sure they can and will still apply - however

I certainly have ate loads of Humble pie! but what you (socs) have to realise is that we were not told about any of this until it was way under way, and we were not asked our opinion until we kicked up a fuss.

Can we start a petition thread towards socs anywhere? or could you give us a link barmeyowls/Masons?

Also "chavs" i believe are for saving the school?? can you offer advice as to how the Wharncliffe , O/bridge and Bradfield communities can help. I also appeal to upper Stannington who were defiant in keeping their catchment, why not help Fight to keep Wisewood open to try and acheive you that??

Your catchments are not guarenteed if the schools merge, and nowhere will you find a full proof guarentee from anyone, it's always "we aim to" or "we certainly will try" "shouldn't effect" etc...etc... you mark my words, the catchments will start getting very interesting.

PM me with ideas or post on here please:)

I thought that it had already been conceded that the schools are to merge??Even Paul Scriven has accepted that. See Lib Dems website

Until you see bricks being built, then don't give in! Abbeydale closure was over turned, so you never know!!

And i had heard those rumours around Wharncliffe that Stocksbridge and Bradfield may merge. What a coincedance that Bradfield is having a rebuild in a few years!!

Sounds like Myers rumours all over again, and lets face it of course the council will deny it (if it is true?) as they did with Wisewood.

What the hell are they doing to the Northwest?

Giselle99 I have sent you a PM.

For info

LABOUR'S 'IMPROVE or close' ultimatum to 638 English schools is a thinly disguised plan to accelerate the privatisation of secondary education. Under their "National Challenge Strategy", schools that have failed to meet the imposed minimum target (of 30% of pupils gaining five A*-C GCSEs including English and Maths) have been put on the government's hit list.

Martin Powell-Davies, secretary, Lewisham National Union of Teachers (NUT)
The price of continued 'failure' will be to become either a privately-sponsored Academy or a Trust school backed by a business or university. Either way, the control of hundreds of schools, including staffing and admissions, will be taken out of the hands of an elected local authority and handed over to private sponsors and trust appointees.

But, instead of planning for the interests of the community as a whole, individual sponsors will put their own interests first, at the expense of other local schools. The fragmentation of education into the control of many different employers is also an obvious threat to collective trade union organisation.

The policy is driven by political dogma, not educational concerns. Despite all the financial advantages offered to them, there is no evidence that academies offer pupils a better education than community schools. After all, how does the government explain why 26 of the schools on the hit list are already academies?

Where academies have succeeded in improving their exam scores, it has too often been down to simply changing the pupil population. For example, academies tend to exclude significantly higher numbers of pupils than neighbouring community schools.

Education Secretary of State, Ed Balls, claims that the policy will help "break the link between poverty and attainment". But a market-driven school system will make divisions greater, not less.

Consistent research demonstrates that the main factor influencing a school's position in the league tables remains the social class of its pupil intake. That's why it is so unfair to impose a common GCSE target on schools, without taking into account the particular circumstances each one faces.

Without a major injection of funding, above all to reduce class sizes to a maximum of 20, there is no chance that schools can overcome factors such as poor housing and diet which inevitably discriminate against children from working-class communities.

But, while waving the big stick, the government is offering little in the way of real resources. Much of the £400 million 'National Challenge' funding is earmarked for academies and trusts - not at supporting schools staying as community comprehensives.

Unfortunately, the unjust labelling of schools as 'failures' will inevitably dissuade local parents from applying, compounding the difficulties they face. Demoralised staff, knowing the bullying inquisitions that these initiatives inevitably bring down on the heads of already overworked teachers, will also look to move to other schools as well.

Trade unionists need to expose the real aims behind this divisive initiative, to use their collective strength to defend staff in the targeted schools and to oppose the break-up of local authority schooling. The strike action taken by NUT members in Bolton to oppose their possible removal from council employment shows the way forward

Barmyowls, where is that copied from? Is it an NUT magazine?

http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/Schools-fight-to-hit-new.4412948.jp

As was stated in the consultation meetings by parents, GCSE results are now starting to decline at Wisewood Secondary - maybe the headteacher of Wisewood should concentrate on her own school rather than someone elses!!!! Seems to me that the merger issue is distracting the headteacher!!!! Parents did state that the merger would have an effect on education being taught at Wisewood - this does now seem the case!!!!

Also, there is a slight improvement in Myers Grove GCSE results, which makes me ask the question, why did the head resign? Myers has improved, and Wisewoods results have declined slightly!!! Is he still on the proposing group also?

What a surprise, results falling already. Just been reading another forum and the rumours about school mergers may well be more focussed towards the s6 primary schools such as Malin Loxley and (what a surprise) Wisewood.


Never saw that coming.:loopy:

Take a read at the following link

http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/Gang-attack-on-car-driver.4417673.jp

Maybe people will stop taking the p#*s now when it is mentioned that there are gangs in Stannington and that a lot of people are worried for their childrens safety!!!

I have not been on this thread for a while and I was just reading through some of the recent comments. With apologies for referring to a comment a while ago, but could someone clarify how DMartin knows they will be a parent governor?

Parents can put their names forward to become governors, but they have to then be elected by other parents of the school. Does this not apply for the new school?

Hi all, back again after a few days at Chavlins. I need to catch up with this thread aswell but interesting isnt it Tweedy.

We've asked this before but DMartin doesnt seem to want to answer this one. Nor any other questions people ask. I prefer debate were people can make points, ask opinion and get two way interaction.

Pro-merger people who just come on for their own agenda and to make points then disappear, while annoying, do serve a purpose as mostly they can make their own points seem silly when faced with facts.

It does seem odd that Proposing group members , seem to be forcing there way as such as governors of the new school with out first being elected!!


Not forgetting, who will be appointing the head of the new school? Its already assumed that Diane McKinley will "walk" into the post. Presumably chosen by the proposing group who she is a member of. How can they make an objective decision when she is part of it?:loopy:

Who's promising people they can be governers of the new school?

Do you know what the sad thing about all this school catchment / closure argument is?

Initially (me included)_ people from Stannington, Wharncliffe , Bradfield etc... did not help to fight to keep Wisewood open because they thought it didn't effect them. (me too!!!)

Unfortunately for us now abit of humble pie is in order as it looks highly likely that all schools and areas in s6 s36 will be effected.

Should have spoke up for Wisewood really shouldn't we!!
Lets try nd make a difference now:)

Better late than never Giselle. Welcome to the party !!!

Not forgetting, who will be appointing the head of the new school? Its already assumed that Diane McKinley will "walk" into the post. Presumably chosen by the proposing group who she is a member of. How can they make an objective decision when she is part of it?:loopy:

Who's promising people they can be governers of the new school?

Welcome back chavs!!

In my opinion its plain to see most if not all of the proposing group members will be governors of the new school, and then after that D Mckinley will be the new head of the new school (she is also a leading proposing group member) Conflict of interest- YES!!!!

Questions or points still unanswerd on the merger the proposing group dont seem to want to answer

It does seem to what im hearing now that feeder school parents are NOW starting to make more of a fuss and perhaps they Thought SOCS could stop the merger , and also thought all they had to do is vote lib dems in and hope they took over the council and they would stop the merger!

I never thought Labour (government) would BLACKMAIL sheffield with not giving funding for all schools if the merger did not go ahead, as i thought the sheffield council was in control of sheffield!!

But its now very important that we keep the wisewood site!! this WILL be needed after 2011 ;):):thumbsup:
Will labour still be our government after the next election ? ;)

Hi all, back again after a few days at Chavlins. I need to catch up with this thread aswell but interesting isnt it Tweedy.

We've asked this before but DMartin doesnt seem to want to answer this one. Nor any other questions people ask. I prefer debate were people can make points, ask opinion and get two way interaction.

Pro-merger people who just come on for their own agenda and to make points then disappear, while annoying, do serve a purpose as mostly they can make their own points seem silly when faced with facts.

Regarding being a Parent Governor, below is a section copied from the Council guidelines called "How to become a governor",
http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/education/governors-homepage/do-you-want-to-be-a-governor

quote:
["Parent governors are elected by other parents whose children attend the school. The arrangements for the election are made by the headteacher. Elected parent governors serve a four-year term of office, which may continue after their child has left the school. All parents should get to hear about vacancies - often through “pupil post”. If you want to stand for election as a parent governor you can ask another parent to nominate you or put your name forward yourself. It is usual for all candidates to write a brief personal statement. This can then be circulated to other parents to help them decide who to vote for."]

If DMartin is reading this, I would really appreciate knowing why the governing body of the new school has different rules to the Council's own?

Am I correct in thinking that the Proposing Group is public body where any member of the public (with a genuine interest in the new school) could join? So, in theory, could I join the Proposing Group and then automatically become a governor also?

Regarding being a Parent Governor, below is a section copied from the Council guidelines called "How to become a governor",
http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/education/governors-homepage/do-you-want-to-be-a-governor

quote:
["Parent governors are elected by other parents whose children attend the school. The arrangements for the election are made by the headteacher. Elected parent governors serve a four-year term of office, which may continue after their child has left the school. All parents should get to hear about vacancies - often through “pupil post”. If you want to stand for election as a parent governor you can ask another parent to nominate you or put your name forward yourself. It is usual for all candidates to write a brief personal statement. This can then be circulated to other parents to help them decide who to vote for."]

If DMartin is reading this, I would really appreciate knowing why the governing body of the new school has different rules to the Council's own?

Am I correct in thinking that the Proposing Group is public body where any member of the public (with a genuine interest in the new school) could join? So, in theory, could I join the Proposing Group and then automatically become a governor also?

Good post!!

But the proposing group are abit picky on who can join them;)

Found out today from a teacher of one of the schools , not sure if its good news or bad news for some?

That catchment areas are going to change as follows-
Some MARCLIFFE and some WPV to be put into catchment for bradfield

Top of STANNINGTON to be put in catchment for new school

Now ive emailed my local councillor for him to confirm this !

But im sure a Proposing group member could confirm this Please!!!

AXED SCHOOL 75TH ANNIVERSARY!!!!


SHEFFIELD school planning to celebrate its 75th anniversary next month is launching a search for its surviving first pupils.
Wisewood School - which will close in 2011 to complete a controversial merger with Stannington's Myers Grove - opened in June 1933.

Headteacher Diane McKinlay said that with all the recent turmoil in the area, the anniversary had passed the school by, until a reminder had arrived from a local history enthusiast Joe Castle.

She said: "It's an excellent idea to mark the anniversary and we will be more than happy to welcome anyone who was in the first group of young people to be taught here."

The first pupils will now be well into their 80s and the plan is to show them the many changes which have taken place on the Rural Lane site.

The school's log book shows Wisewood originally had 460 pupils, drawn from Malin Bridge, Hillsborough and Marlcliffe primaries.

Although the school opened in June, the official opening did not take place until September 1933 with official duties carried out by Alderman Harold Jackson.

Wisewood was built to take in children from the surrounding new estate,

Building began around 1927 and grew to around 900 assorted houses, constructed at a cost of around £400,000.

The land for the school, at the corner of Ben Lane and Rural Lane, was purchased at a cost of £1,350 in 1927 from a local farmer.

The site became the home of the junior and senior schools.

Former pupils from the era are being asked to contact the school directly at the start of the new term to liaise over a date for the anniversary celebrations.

The school can be contacted on 0114 2333606.

Found out today from a teacher of one of the schools , not sure if its good news or bad news for some?

That catchment areas are going to change as follows-
Some MARCLIFFE and some WPV to be put into catchment for bradfield

Top of STANNINGTON to be put in catchment for new school

Now ive emailed my local councillor for him to confirm this !

But im sure a Proposing group member could confirm this Please!!!

We knew this would happen, and it does make sense-should the school merger go ahead- but hopefully it won't!

Could there be a legal challenge to schools merger?



all know the merger of Wisewood and Myers schools was a sham, but an idea from the proposing group for a bridge from Loxley Road towards Myers is being forced through.
And, as expected Labour are behind this idea - over green belt land I may add.

At what cost? I would expect a lot of funding is being applied for.

It seems this merger will cost a lot more than was first suggested and I wonder if the heads of school who said it may effect their school budget if the merger did not happen know about more money that will be needed. Will this affect their budgets?

There's a problem as we know with the falling rolls: the new school will not be big enough for the pupils in the catchment area. Indeed on the council website the figures seem to point out no real falling rolls.

So I'll just point this out to all parents of feeder schools: your child may not get in to the new school and will have to find another secondary. So what are your options? Well Bradfield will be full and the new school will not be big enough, so it's a case of travelling across town or whereever for your child!

Lib Dems pointed out problems over the new school not being big enough, traffic problems etc etc and the minister, Jim Knight agreed but did not listen. in fact he blackmailed Sheffield: if the merger does not happen, Sheffield will not get funding for all its schools.

I've asked a solicitor about this and he says this can't be done legally - in fact there could be court action if the Labour Party did.

. I know a lot of teachers at Wisewood do not want this merger and have been told to not speak out in case of losing their job (this was under the Labour council). Time to fight for your jobs in my opinion.



Interesting letter in sheffield star !!

Thought i would add this -from sheffield star as i know parents read this thread!!

Robbers out to prey on pupils


By Claire Lewis
CHILDREN returning to school next week are being warned to be on their guard against robbers targeting them for gadgets in their bags.
South Yorkshire Police joined forces with the national Children's Safety Education Forum to urge parents to talk to their children about the risks of carrying mobile phones, MP3 players, cash and expensive trainers in their PE kit.

Insp Stuart Edwards, of the South Yorkshire Police Crime and Disorder Reduction Unit, said: "Although offences of robbery have decreased significantly across our force area, students still need to take care of their own property.

"Some useful tips are: avoid using mobile phones and MP3 players in public. If you need to, make sure you are aware of others around you. If you feel nervous, you may have good cause, so put them away.

"Try and keep with groups of friends when in public. Walk in well-lit areas, and always be aware of what is happening around you.

"Tell your parents or those that care for you, where you are going and what time you are to be expected back.

"If you know the route you are to take, let them know that as well.

"Although our neighbourhood officers and PCSOs work closely within local schools to raise crime reduction awareness, crime will still occur if the children and their parents or carers do not take these simple steps to protect themselves and their property."

John McNamee, forum chief executive, said: "At this time of year, children are often too excited about the start of the new term and often forget basic precautions when it comes to road awareness, and keeping themselves and their possessions safe.

"Children are also particularly vulnerable to being victims of robbery at the start of term. They are often equipped with new gadgets, such as mobile phones, MP3 players and perhaps even the latest trainers as part of their PE kits."

From sheffield telegraph!


We do not accept the struggle is over

Toby Mallinson, Chair, Save Our Community Schools


IT WAS very rich of Jan Wilson to try to make political capital at the Lib Dems' expense over the issue of the closures of Myers Grove and Wisewood Schools.
The facts remain that this was a top-down New Labour plan made with no consideration of local issues and implemented by her administration.

The Government told Sheffield Council that it would have to show how it was reducing surplus places. Myers Grove and Wisewood were chosen as sacrificial lambs in this process, not because of falling rolls in the area.

They were chosen because:
There was no plan at the time for rebuilding or refurbishing either school.

Smaller community schools do not fit current Government thinking for cheaper 1,000+ schools.

Myers Grove has been a longstanding problem for the council (of their own making) and this proposal neatly solves it - at great cost to the Hillsborough community.

The figures showing the projected falling rolls were rigged to show a large decline in numbers. As time passes, the deception is being revealed.

It is becoming increasingly clear that the proposed new school will not have sufficient capacity for the students in its catchment.
The location of the new school would be geographically isolated from Hillsborough by the Loxley Valley. All traffic to the school would have to negotiated the already congested junction at Malin Bridge causing huge problems for existing commuters in Stannington, the Loxley Valley and Hillsborough.

However, worst of all is the fact that Hillsborough would lose an irreplaceable asset forever - its local, popular and successful school at Wisewood.

We do not accept that the struggle to save the schools is over. It is vital that local people use their voice to oppose the scheme as it enters the planning application process.

From sheffield telegraph!!

A council that listens to the electorate

, Sheffield S6


I would like to reply to some of the points raised by the former leader of Sheffield City Council, Jan Wilson.
First, Wisewood is being closed against the wishes of the majority of parents and children.

Second, when something is "not likely", it does not mean it is not possible. Therefore the Lib Dems did the correct thing when they tried to change the decision and make the government take notice of the will of the electorate.

In contrast Jan Wilson blindly tried to deliver government policy and has paid the price.

Third, to myself and other concerned parents it seems all 32 head teachers of Sheffield have been blackmailed into carrying out the government's plans by the threatened withdrawal of the funding for their schools.

Fourth, the Labour council tried to justify the closure decision by presenting debatable statistics about falling rolls. At best these were just a guess and at worst they could be construed by some as a deliberate attempt to mislead the electorate.

Fifth and final, contrary to Jan Wilson's proposal, my faith in the democratic process is undimished.

Most of the Labour councillors involved in this debacle were voted out, the Labour council was deposed and Sheffield is now governed by a council that seems to want to listen to the electorate. If only central government were the same ... but then perhaps it will be shortly.



My opinion is the fight goes on:):)

Wisewood school letter -

my child brought the letter home from school by the governing body (signed by Steve Bell) and in it was-

'We have exceeded our targets on all accounts. In addition, the LEA has now changed the status of Wisewood to a Category 1 school - the highest achievable within the city'

'The position of the Governing body continues to be one of reluctant support for the merger'

'I would want to make it absolutely clear that since the conclusion of the original consultation process, the Governing body has not been approached by any other group, including the current administration to discuss any further options'

'The Governing body has representation on the Proposing group body - the group that is charged with progressing the merger - and whilst not a member of the Proposing group, Diane McKinlay will continue to act as an expert adviser to that group'

I have some questions regarding these points:

If Wisewood Secondary is now a Category 1 school - Why close the school and risk losing that success? - another reason for saving it I think!!!

Why are the Governing body reluctantly supporting the merger - if they disagree with it they should fight to keep it open shouldnt they?

Im sure SOCS have approached the Governing body but there ideas turned down as the Governing body stated that they now back the merger - Why are they saying that they have not been approached?

When did Diane McKinlay leave the proposing group and what makes her an expert adviser on school mergers? Who is actually on the proposing group now as there are 4 that have left that I know about - there may be others?

If needed, I can ask SOCS to put this letter on their website if people want to read it.

Also just to let you know That socs are still fighting to stop the merger as ive had a parents saying have socs backed down - and that they still want us to stop the merger

Wisewood school letter -


'I would want to make it absolutely clear that since the conclusion of the original consultation process, the Governing body has not been approached by any other group, including the current administration to discuss any further options'

Daz, what a shame that you have only quoted part of this paragraph - the part quoted does not seem to make sense UNLESS you read it with the rest - I too have received the letter from my kids.

The sentence after the one you quote actuially answers the question you have asked - namely about this group allegedly ignoring your alternative.

In fact, the next sentence states that "Our position has therefore remained as one of reluctant support, given the lack of any FULLY FUNDED alternative and realistic proposal".

Perhaps Daz you could let us all know what FULLY FUNDED proposal SOCS put to this group, that was acceptable to both national and local government and council?? :huh:

[QUOTE=masonsarmsfc;4040709]Wisewood school letter -


'I would want to make it absolutely clear that since the conclusion of the original consultation process, the Governing body has not been approached by any other group, including the current administration to discuss any further options'

Daz, what a shame that you have only quoted part of this paragraph - the part quoted does not seem to make sense UNLESS you read it with the rest - I too have received the letter from my kids.

The sentence after the one you quote actuially answers the question you have asked - namely about this group allegedly ignoring your alternative.

In fact, the next sentence states that "Our position has therefore remained as one of reluctant support, given the lack of any FULLY FUNDED alternative and realistic proposal".

Perhaps Daz you could let us all know what FULLY FUNDED proposal SOCS put to this group, that was acceptable to both national and local government and council?? :huh:

Harry, who are you talking to?? There is no user called Daz on here:loopy::loopy:

[QUOTE=Harryarwen;4046901]

Harry, who are you talking to?? There is no user called Daz on here:loopy::loopy:

Whoops sorry! after all the postings and speculation about who I am (Harry Harpham, member of Proposing group, ex-labour supporter etc etc), sorry to fall in to the same trap!! I herewith withdraw from naming Daz!! - I readily acknowledge that there is no user called Daz on here. I will reverty to using MasonsarmsFc etc in future postings. Sorry !!!! :huh::loopy:

Good to see though that my posting has resulted in the first real deabte again in weeks - thought the thread had died out.

Good now after my apology t get back to the real issue - why did "Masons" who clearly states that he/she (politically correct, I hope), or any others not address my point about the QUOTE from the letter to paretns from Wisewood being taken out of context?

I repeat therefore the request to SOCS directly - has SOCS or any of its members been able to submit a FULLY FUNDED alterntaive proposal to the merger at ther Wood LAne site to either the a. Governing body at Wisewood school, b. The Governing body at Myers Grove, c. The Pro posing group, d. Any of the decision making political groups?????

I guess that any Governing body worth its salt would ONLY consider serious and rational and FUNDED proposals wouldn't they?

....... has SOCS or any of its members been able to submit a FULLY FUNDED alterntaive proposal to the merger at ther Wood LAne site to either the a. Governing body at Wisewood school, b. The Governing body at Myers Grove, c. The Pro posing group, d. Any of the decision making political groups?????

I guess that any Governing body worth its salt would ONLY consider serious and rational and FUNDED proposals wouldn't they?

Harryarwen, I think you are being quite unreasonable about SOCS. They are a group of people from the local community who obviously believe passionately that the decision to merge Wisewood and Myers Grove is wrong. They are a group of people who have campaigned tirelessly over the last 2 years for both schools to be retained. They are not a political party and have no say over funding of any kind. How on earth can you expect SOCS to come up with a “fully funded” alternative? They have acted as a voice for the majority of the community, putting forward sensible and fair suggestions.

A “fully funded” alternative is something the Labour Council should have addressed from the offset rather than ‘forcing’ one option on to the Wisewood community. As the merger was obviously a forgone conclusion, then perhaps a “fully funded” merger would have been a good place to start –

there are funds for a new, merged school, but one -
which will not be large enough for predicted pupil numbers;
which does not include a pupil transport plan;
which does not include a traffic plan to address congestion and pupil safety;
which does not include a plan to support the empty Wisewood site;
which has already cost over a quarter of a million pounds.

Where is this funding to come from?

And of course, not forgetting funding will also be needed to keep the promise made by Cllr Harry Harpham at one of the original consultation meetings – as a gesture of goodwill, free, new school uniforms to the pupils disrupted by the closure of the schools. How kind.

Hallo

Though you might be interested in the result of the vote at July's Full Council. You can check the minutes on the Council website :

The Labour party wants the site reserved for community use. Cllr Janet Bragg moved an amendment at the end of July Council meeting to secure the site for Community use. The amendment was passed both major parties voting in favour. However the Lib Dems then moved their own amendment which deleted the motion and the amendment that had gone before it. This means that Wisewood School could be sold off for almost any purpose.

Hallo

Though you might be interested in the result of the vote at July's Full Council. You can check the minutes on the Council website :

The Labour party wants the site reserved for community use. Cllr Janet Bragg moved an amendment at the end of July Council meeting to secure the site for Community use. The amendment was passed both major parties voting in favour. However the Lib Dems then moved their own amendment which deleted the motion and the amendment that had gone before it. This means that Wisewood School could be sold off for almost any purpose.

Wisewood gym site can not be sold off!!! as over 2million would have to be paid back to lotto - This is in writing!!!!

Could you give us a link to the council mins in july - as i cant seem to find them,
Ive asked A sangar and a local councillor and both have got back stating that IF the merger went ahead the wisewood site would only be used for the community - if i have the link ill email them back with it
thanks

Minutes of July meeting

http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/your-city-council/council-meetings/full-council/agenda-3rd-september-2008/minutes-30th-july-2008

PG 27 of the minutes is the part with Janet Braggs amendment - it was carried!!!

Does anyone actually really believe that The Wisewood site will be used for education? It won't as there will be no funding left. And i am fairly certain that Wisewood Primary will close within the next few years too.

It's so badly planned it's all premed!! The council will do what they like.

It's a shame because Wisewood has the most outstanding results and achievements this year, and it won't pass onto Myers.

Wait while the catchment debate starts up again because they ARE going to change to accomodate the new school being too small!!

The s35 / Bradfield Wharncliffe side are going to go hell bent now to try and stop the Merger, if anything to keep their places secure at Bradfield.

I will fight along with the other many many many people of this community to keep the schools open!!!

WE MIGHT NOT HAVE ALTERNATIVE FUNDING, BUT WE HAVE COMMUNITY SPIRIT AND DEVOTION, AND IT AIN'T OVER TILL ITS OVER!!!!!!

Gisell99, I totally agree with your comments.

As soon as more 'affluent' areas start to make a noise, the wheels will start to turn. Not forgetting Bradfield is due for a new, larger build.

an idea from the proposing group for a bridge from Loxley Road towards Myers is being forced through.
And, as expected Labour are behind this idea - over green belt land I may add.

At what cost? I would expect a lot of funding is being applied for.

Does anyone know the details of planned route across the valley?

Ive heard that the plan is for the pupils to go through the Loxley Park development but wondered if this was fact? Have any plans been published or anything.

I would expect quite a few would be opposed to such a footpath at this location and wondered if they are aware, example - local Labour MP, Loxley Valley Protection Society etc?

Wisewood gym site can not be sold off!!! as over 2million would have to be paid back to lotto - This is in writing!!!!

Could you give us a link to the council mins in july - as i cant seem to find them,
Ive asked A sangar and a local councillor and both have got back stating that IF the merger went ahead the wisewood site would only be used for the community - if i have the link ill email them back with it
thanks

Hi. Yes, I've got the Council Summons dated 3rd September in front of me. The link is :

www.sheffield.gov.uk/your-city-council/council-meetings/full-council/agenda-3rd-september-2008/minutes-30th-july-2008

Click on minutes for 30th July 2008 and check item 11 : "Notice of motion concerning Myers Grove and Wisewood Schools".

You'll see Janet Bragg's amendment (f) and (g), proposing "that the site should not be sold for housing or any other development and that this site be retained for use by the local community". You'll also see that this was carried.

The next sentence shows another amendment proposed by Andrew Sangar which "deletes all the words after the words "That this Council""".

The result is that the Labour amendment to keep the building for community use, has been overturned. Nowhere in the Lib Dems amendment is there any mention of community use for the school. I don't know why Andrew Sangar should say one thing and vote for another in Full Council.

Hi. Yes, I've got the Council Summons dated 3rd September in front of me. The link is :

www.sheffield.gov.uk/your-city-council/council-meetings/full-council/agenda-3rd-september-2008/minutes-30th-july-2008

Click on minutes for 30th July 2008 and check item 11 : "Notice of motion concerning Myers Grove and Wisewood Schools".

You'll see Janet Bragg's amendment (f) and (g), proposing "that the site should not be sold for housing or any other development and that this site be retained for use by the local community". You'll also see that this was carried.

The next sentence shows another amendment proposed by Andrew Sangar which "deletes all the words after the words "That this Council""".

The result is that the Labour amendment to keep the building for community use, has been overturned. Nowhere in the Lib Dems amendment is there any mention of community use for the school. I don't know why Andrew Sangar should say one thing and vote for another in Full Council.

Thanks Rosy:thumbsup:

Does anyone know the details of planned route across the valley?

Ive heard that the plan is for the pupils to go through the Loxley Park development but wondered if this was fact? Have any plans been published or anything.

I would expect quite a few would be opposed to such a footpath at this location and wondered if they are aware, example - local Labour MP, Loxley Valley Protection Society etc?

I have a copy of a email from a sheffield labour MP, stating the above ABOUT THE BRIDGE . and it goes on about funding etc as yet there are no plans been made i think .but this was raised by Jim knight im told about the bridge as well in the lib dems meeting in london , im trying to get hold of perhaps mins of that meeting

Hi masonsarmsfc
I have a response from DCSF which outlines what was discussed at the meeting with Jim white, I am happy to share if you think it will be of any use?

Hallo

Though you might be interested in the result of the vote at July's Full Council. You can check the minutes on the Council website :

The Labour party wants the site reserved for community use. Cllr Janet Bragg moved an amendment at the end of July Council meeting to secure the site for Community use. The amendment was passed both major parties voting in favour. However the Lib Dems then moved their own amendment which deleted the motion and the amendment that had gone before it. This means that Wisewood School could be sold off for almost any purpose.
Hello Rosy,

If the Labour Party is committed to retaining the Wisewood site for community use, why is it zoned for housing in the draft of the new Sheffield Development Framework, written under Labour?

Another impressive about-turn. It's a shame Labour never did any of these fine things when in power! It's say one thing, and do another...

As you well know, the amendment you are talking about was submitted days before the meeting, and long before we had even seen Cllr Bragg's amendment. You could hardly expect us to vote against our own amendment!

We are committed to finding community uses for the site as evidenced by Cllr Sangar's statement in Full Council saying that the gym would be retained for the community.

What uses specifically? It's not possible to say at this stage. But the last thing we want is for the site to be turned into a massive housing estate.

That's the position of this administration and to claim otherwise is just cynical politicking.

Hi masonsarmsfc
I have a response from DCSF which outlines what was discussed at the meeting with Jim white, I am happy to share if you think it will be of any use?

Thanks will PM you:thumbsup:

Hello Rosy,

If the Labour Party is committed to retaining the Wisewood site for community use, why is it zoned for housing in the draft of the new Sheffield Development Framework, written under Labour?

Another impressive about-turn. It's a shame Labour never did any of these fine things when in power! It's say one thing, and do another...

As you well know, the amendment you are talking about was submitted days before the meeting, and long before we had even seen Cllr Bragg's amendment. You could hardly expect us to vote against our own amendment!

We are committed to finding community uses for the site as evidenced by Cllr Sangar's statement in Full Council saying that the gym would be retained for the community.

What uses specifically? It's not possible to say at this stage. But the last thing we want is for the site to be turned into a massive housing estate.

That's the position of this administration and to claim otherwise is just cynical politicking.

Thanks for clearing this up:thumbsup:

As you well know, the amendment you are talking about was submitted days before the meeting, and long before we had even seen Cllr Bragg's amendment. You could hardly expect us to vote against our own amendment!

Why not withdraw it then? Could it be that you wanted the opportunity to have a go at Labour, which is the essence of your amendment, and were prepared to overturn a resolution which could have secured the future of the site in order to do a bit of cynical politicking yourselves?

Why not withdraw it then? Could it be that you wanted the opportunity to have a go at Labour, which is the essence of your amendment, and were prepared to overturn a resolution which could have secured the future of the site in order to do a bit of cynical politicking yourselves?

IF the school was to close (lets hope theres still a chance to keep it open;))

Why dont labour and lib dems fight together to keep the site for the community!! i.e youth club, older person club etc etc

I am really looking forward to seeing a progression of the debate about the future of the Wisewood site post merger on the Wood Lane site However..........;.

The one thing that I am convinced about the Wisewood site is that this site must:

a. Retain the Sports Hall in whatever format and specifically for the local community - goes without saying!! (unless the council wishes to pay back what I guess must be millions to presumably lottery funding and other grant making bodies?

b. The site should be placed in the hands of the local community (however this is defined) for appropriate community decision and use.

c. Housing - to my mind - should be the very last option - this site was earmarked for educational use, and whilst in my mind obsolete as a going concern year on year for kids, could and SHOULD be used as a community based educational facility for the local and perhaps even wider Sheffield 6 and beyond adult community.

QUESTION: Who is in charge of looking at this and where is any accountability and reporting mechanism?? -

'We have exceeded our targets on all accounts. In addition, the LEA has now changed the status of Wisewood to a Category 1 school - the highest achievable within the city'



The above quote is from the wisewood school letter - great to hear this and that WISEWOOD is now a catagory 1 school:thumbsup::thumbsup:

Just wondered how many catagory 1 schools there is in sheffield does anyone know?

And how many catagory 1 schools have closed or are due to close?


Come on someone must know the answer ?

Is bradfield a catagory 1 school ?

Is bradfield a catagory 1 school ?

Why not ring them up and ask.
Or failing that the link below should give you the information you require.

http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/education/our-schools/school-performance/performance-tables

Why not ring them up and ask.
Or failing that the link below should give you the information you require.

http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/education/our-schools/school-performance/performance-tables


Thanks for the link:)

My child came home other day and was saying that the head of wisewood was talking about how well wisewood pupils have done blah ,blah

And in my opinion brainwashing them about how we need a new school!

One child asked "if wisewood is doing so well WHY DOES IT NEED TO CLOSE?"

the head of wisewood said ill get back to you -BUT did not!!!!

stupid merger my child said -

And in my opinion

Excellent post Barmy - good to see that opinions on here have become individualised at last and NOT allegedly representative. :D

[QUOTE=barmyowls;4107884]And in my opinion QUOTE]

Excellent post Barmy - good to see that opinions on here have become individualised at last and NOT allegedly representative. :D

Not sure what your getting at- but please keep on topic!!

[QUOTE=Harryarwen;4109514]

Not sure what your getting at- but please keep on topic!!

Sorry Barmy, but no idea now what you are on about?

The first time I happen to agree with you for once on this thread you choose to challenge in a negative way? I AM CLEArlY ON TOPIC MATE!! Soz but wot is one meant to do?? No posts for weeks on end on this thread, other than the odd one every 2 or 3 days and then an encouraging response to me that supports you, and you challenge it ???? ---- or so it seems. Sorry if I've got the wrong end of the stick here ---- please explain further as I was fully behind your stance as an individual here on this thread and away and aside from all the collective claims (claims? if that's the right word) to represent other groups. What I thought we had got back to was a clear PERSONAL debate about the issues around a new school on the Wood Lane site, between individuals and NOT GROUPS OF THOSE ANTI OR PRO ------ what I clearly meant that was for once neither you, not other posters on this thread, nor me nor anybody who might well follow my thread of arguement, COULD claim to represent any group at all.

What obviously matters is the future of statutory education for our kids in whatever iteration of provision, and that is what I am happy to debate with you, outside any issue relating to structures or future of either Myers or Wisewood.

I think the recent contributions to this debate over the last few weeks on this thread serve to prove that point - don't you? = as they are minimal if not non-existant!

So, no need this time to tell me to stay on topic - I HAVE DONE SO - Perhaps it is those with the alternative view that contradicts the current stance of the ruling Lib Dem administration that need to make their case for a viable alternative clear - an alternative that is funded and equitable amongst ALL political groups - the one thing I know is that for Lib Dems, Tory, Labour, Green and any other alterntive that the only CLEAR and FUNDED option is the current proposal that NOW seems to be whole heartedly supported by the current locally and city wide elected political administration. I am aware that even now the Lib Dems have acknowledged their full and unreserved support for a new school on the Wood Lane site. For once, YES - I AM on topic - sorry you can't accept the arguement! For us parents who do support this merger - what mega news!!

I am aware that even now the Lib Dems have acknowledged their full and unreserved support for a new school on the Wood Lane site. For once, YES - I AM on topic - sorry you can't accept the arguement! For us parents who do support this merger - what mega news!!

They are only supporting it because they have been blackmailed into doing so - The Lib Dems were not going to risk the BSF funding for all the schools in Sheffield now were they???

They are only supporting it because they have been blackmailed into doing so - The Lib Dems were not going to risk the BSF funding for all the schools in Sheffield now were they???

Why didn't they think of that before making promises they couldn't keep? They knew perfectly well that there was no way that Wisewood could be kept open without risking the whole of the city's funding.

Why didn't they think of that before making promises they couldn't keep? They knew perfectly well that there was no way that Wisewood could be kept open without risking the whole of the city's funding.

Lib dems went to jim knight with options to keep wisewood open !!

As reported in the star i recall.

But lets think about it some more Education in sheffield is not great according to the tables etc

But hear we have a great School Thats getting great Gcse results and is now a Category 1 school-The highest achievable in sheffield - Now is it the building that make this school so great or the teachers and staff or both?
I think its both!!!!!

So if now the school is the highest it can be in sheffield Why close?

Its been stated if the merger goes ahead they want the new school to be the best in sheffield - wisewood is now is it not?

Lib dems may have no option but to state in open that they have to back the merger BUT behind close doors - Things are still going on to save wisewood im told . So We will just have to wait and see:):thumbsup:

Quote:
Originally Posted by bazjea
Have the Tories said they would stop the combining of Wisewood and
Myers-grove schools. If not I do not see what the point is of delaying tactics.
Perhaps you can explain.


I cant say at present what has been said

Quote
Lib dems may have no option but to state in open that they have to back the merger BUT behind close doors - Things are still going on to save wisewood im told . So We will just have to wait and see
27-09-2008 03:32 PM

Back in July you couldn't say what was being discussed by theTories. Now we have behind closed doors meetings by the Lib Dems.
How much longer is this cloak and dagger stuff to go on.
At this rate the school will be built and secret discussions will still be taking place.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bazjea
Have the Tories said they would stop the combining of Wisewood and
Myers-grove schools. If not I do not see what the point is of delaying tactics.
Perhaps you can explain.




Quote
Lib dems may have no option but to state in open that they have to back the merger BUT behind close doors - Things are still going on to save wisewood im told . So We will just have to wait and see
27-09-2008 03:32 PM

Back in July you couldn't say what was being discussed by theTories. Now we have behind closed doors meetings by the Lib Dems.
How much longer is this cloak and dagger stuff to go on.
At this rate the school will be built and secret discussions will still be taking place.

I understand your points- but we will have to wait and see still on this merger - i cant say what i know ;) but only things are still going on behind closed doors that i know of

I understand your points- but we will have to wait and see still on this merger - i cant say what i know ;) but only things are still going on behind closed doors that i know of

The merger is of public concern, so surely any thing that is going on should be in the public domain. I contacted the Tory local office back in july, about their stance or policy on the merger. Have not received a reply. So would assume they do not have any input or policy.

Harry Harpham is back on the Wisewood estate doing his leafletting duty again - im sure the Labour Party send him to Wisewood on purpose just to stick the knife in that little bit further!!!

This time the leaflet is in the form of a letter from David Blunkett - the usual rubbish about the merger and how it must go ahead and that it is now time try and heal the wounds!!!

Sorry - but the wounds just got deeper!!!!!

Why didn't they think of that before making promises they couldn't keep?

I suspect it had something to do with wanting loads of votes at the local election.

Why didn't they think of that before making promises they couldn't keep? They knew perfectly well that there was no way that Wisewood could be kept open without risking the whole of the city's funding.

I think you will find that back in 2007 the lib dems made the promise to keep Wisewood open - and they then had the merger stopped - only for the Labour Party to get the merger going again!!!!

After that the Lib Dems didnt promise anything - and they certainly didnt promise to keep Wisewood open should they get into power at the last elections.

I think you will find that back in 2007 the lib dems made the promise to keep Wisewood open - and they then had the merger stopped - only for the Labour Party to get the merger going again!!!!

After that the Lib Dems didnt promise anything - and they certainly didnt promise to keep Wisewood open should they get into power at the last elections.


Thats not what I was told I understand that they made promises left right and centre about keeping the school open

Thats not what I was told I understand that they made promises left right and centre about keeping the school open

Labour i recall promised to listen to the communitys and what they was saying as well .

End of the day . Wisewood is one of the top schools in sheffield it seems and Labour still want to shut it:loopy: