The following questions address queries raised relation to our 2017 Admissions Consultation report. Following an unsuccessful challenge by an individual the policy has also been fully scrutinised by Schools Adjudicator,. You can read the determination here.
Yes, these are shown below. For those who responded "no" and left a comment we have separated out those who said they wanted more places for the permanent site and those who wanted more places for the admissions point. Those who didn't leave a comment or whose comment was unclear have been put in a third category.
Yes: | 23 |
No (want more for admissions point): | 3 |
No (want more permanent site): | 17 |
No (reason unstated or unclear): | 2 |
Don't know: | 2 |
Yes: | 71 |
No (want more for admissions point): | 10 |
No (want more permanent site): | 82 |
No (reason unstated or unclear): | 8 |
Don't know: | 5 |
Yes: | 31 |
No (want more for admissions point): | 4 |
No (want more for permanent site): | 20 |
No (reason unstated or unclear): | 1 |
Don't know: | 5 |
Yes: | 6 |
No (want more for admissions point): | 3 |
No (want more permanent site): | 99 |
No (reason unstated or unclear): | 17 |
Don't know: | 3 |
We asked people whether they were responding as the parent of a 2017 applicant, another primary parent, a secondary parent, another individual or an organisation. It was only possible for respondents to make one selection, and we assumed that families with children of mixed ages would select the category that was most relevant to their response. In future consultations we will make sure we state this assumption and include a category for children who are younger than primary age too.
Yes, other options were discussed at length. However, as stated in the report we are deferring any decision to change the proportions until a later date so that we can get further clarity on a number of issues. A decision will be made before we move to our permanent site.
Yes, a high level list of consultees was given in the report, and more detail is below. At the launch of the consultation we notified:
Yes, in January there was local press coverage of councillors' statements in relation to the consultation in both Richmond and Hounslow, and a Whitton councillor promoted the consultation via Twitter e.g. on Dec 10th,Jan 14th & 15th. Information and views on the consultation was also circulated on Twitter and Facebook by the Whitton Village social media group e.g. on Dec 10th, Jan 14th, 15th, 26th, 27th from where they were shared by many individuals within their own social media networks.
Yes, the numbers are as follows:
Whitton | 117 |
Heathfield | 89 |
West Twickenham | 60 |
Fulwell & Hampton Hill | 44 |
South Twickenham | 26 |
Hounslow Borough | 17 |
Teddington | 14 |
Hampton North | 13 |
Hampton | 10 |
Unknown | 10 |
St Mgts & North Twick | 3 |
Twick Riverside | 2 |
Other Richmond Wards | 6 |
Other out of borough | 6 |