Route 39 – Certainly Closer to Closure?

Having taken some time to reflect upon the the documentation submitted by Route 39 to the Planning Inspectorate which; without any shred of irony, they refer to as their ‘proof of evidence’, one could again be inclined to question and challenge some of the statements that have now been put forward as justification for overturning the majority decision made last September by our locally and democratically elected representatives on Torridge District Council’s planning committee.

Playing the blame game!

In statements submitted by Mr Richard Bence, Chairman of Route 39’s Board of Trustees, Route 39 is plainly seeking to place the blame for the schools woeful record of attracting and retaining students on the fact that they haven’t been able to spend upwards of £2 million building their ‘vision’, bang in the middle of our protected AONB countryside.

The document states “Significant concern and uncertainty on students and parents who had already chosen Route 39 Academy as their secondary school and were due to start in September 2013. This led to a reduction in the number of students attending in the first year by an estimated 5 students. Continued uncertainty regarding site has led to significant student instability. In Year 1 of operation, 25 students left during the year and to date, 21 have left this, our second year. This has been balanced in part by students joining, dissatisfied with other schools. In Year 1, 20 students joined the Academy in year and to date 15 have joined this year.”

As usual, this ‘evidence’ makes completely unsubstantiated claims about parents dissatisfaction at other local secondary schools (another example of the denigration of our local school provision that Route 39 openly say they never do!) yet makes no clear comment at all about the dissatisfaction of both parents and students that have left Route 39 for a myriad of reasons, choosing only to say this was because of ‘uncertainty’.

Of the parents who have pulled their children out of Route 39, while uncertainty may indeed have played a small role in their decision, in almost all cases it most certainly was not the primary driver. The quality of teaching, the behaviour of fellow students, odd-ball teaching methods, transport costs, lack of proper governance and the strong perception among some parents that Route 39 has become a school catering predominantly for SEN children from around the wider region (in order to keep the student numbers viable) are just some of the many examples cited by some of these parents that made this very difficult decision for their children.

It is very wrong to grossly generalise the deeply held feelings of these parents, who made their original choice with the very best intentions, but who quickly found that the reality of Route 39 was far, far removed from the image that they were ‘sold’. Rather than undermine these parents, Route 39 might consider acknowledging their failures and admit publicly that their experiment in education does not, in fact, have all the answers for all parents and students.

It’s not us, it’s them!

The documents go on to blame Route 39’s inadequacies on everyone else but themselves. “While the temporary accommodation provides sufficient resources to cover the 11 to 14 curriculum, the Academy is unable to implement significant aspects of the vision including land-based learning. In addition, options for GCSE are limited as there are few specialist facilities available. We have lost a couple students recently to other schools able to offer a broader curriculum. Continued uncertainty regarding a permanent site have had a negative impact on the recruitment and retention of both staff and students. This year alone we have had two candidates refused an interview and one refused a job offer due to uncertainty regarding the permanent site.”

So, according to Route 39, it’s not only the fault of all the other schools locally that have better facilities, better GCSE options and a broader curriculum, it is also the fault of those teachers that refused to join their school. Again, they put this down to that elusive condition of ‘uncertainty’. So did these professional teachers not buy in strongly enough to Route 39’s ‘vision’, were they not offered enough money (Route 39 is not restricted as to what they pay in salaries to staff) or did they perhaps see something in the way the school is actually operating that rang alarm bells? After all, Route 39 did promise its parents and students that their teachers and teaching would be ‘outstanding’, so it stands to reason that teachers would be throwing themselves at Route 39, wouldn’t they?

And while not content at simply blaming those teachers that didn’t want a job at this particular Free School, Route 39  goes on to pillory Torridge’s District Councillors on the Planning Committee. Not withstanding the fact that these people are democratically elected and that they are duty bound to exercise their duties under the Nolan Principals for Public Office, showing no fear or favour in their decision making, the statement castigates TDC Councillors by proxy because they didn’t deliver what Route 39’s board of Governors had promised to the parents, students and staff of the school. “Parents have experienced the outcome of two Torridge Planning Committee decisions and have no faith in the committee acting in the best interest of their children. It would be unreasonable to expect parents and students to have the will to endure another planning application that would require the approval of the Planning Committee once again…The delays caused by Torridge in planning applications for Route 39 Academy have had a significant impact on the short-term viability of the Academy.”

So what is the motivation?

“The progress of the Academy thus far has placed significant reliance on the team of volunteer Governors. Many have worked for four years on the Academy without pay and at significant cost personally and on their families. I am concerned that there is a point at which this volunteer goodwill becomes exhausted.” Route 39 seem, within this statement to perhaps hint that Route 39 Governors should, in fact, be paid for the work that they have done over the past four years!  This is incredible! Route 39 would do well to realise that school governors at all schools across the area and in fact across the nation, don’t do what they do for money, we all do it because it is precisely what needs to be done for the children. As Governors we volunteer to help our schools and we don’t expect to get paid for it! Why should Governors at Route 39 be any different?

The future is certainly uncertain!

Like a soothsayer reading the runes, Route 39 finally launch themselves into predictions for the future. “The viability of the Academy going forward is reliant on the number of students attending. The impact of continued uncertainty regarding the site has a high likelihood of dissuading future applicants.” they appealingly state.  “As funding is based on the number of students attending the Academy there will be a number of students below which the Academy is no longer viable. It is not possible to give an accurate figure for this as it is dependent on the needs of the students, the breadth of years and the number of students in each year.”

It might be suggested by some that this prediction is already false – the Education Funding Agency (EFA) set a minimum intake of 50 students per year into Route 39 and the academy has consistently failed to attract and, crucially, retain these numbers of students. Indeed, with only 139 students signed to attend the school from September 2015 (Update October 2015 – only 130 actually turned up in September!), the school has only 35% of the total number is stated it would have in its EFA funding application.

It is not unknown for the EFA to withdraw its (our) funding from unviable free schools and academies and with the current situation continuing, it can perhaps be said with a greater degree of certainty than ever that Route 39 is now certainly closer to closure.

Hurrah for Common Sense!

Today, bravery, democracy and common sense truly prevailed and I would like to send a heartfelt ‘Thank You’ on behalf of myself, my school governing body and all the secondary school children of the area, to the members of Torridge District Councils Planning Committee, who this morning overwhelmingly rejected the application by Route 39 Academy Trust to temporarily site a completely unwarranted ‘free’ school at a theme park here in North Devon.

The good people objecting against this quite obscene waste of educational funds (tax payers money) are just local residents, concerned parents and a few dedicated educationalists, who have come together in a common cause to resist what has plainly been a less than subtle attempt by a very small group of clearly misguided, misinformed and ultimately self-serving individuals to subvert the democratic and socially responsible process of public consultation that we revere in this country.

Let’s not beat about the bush – Route 39 thought that they had this whole thing stitched up from the start! The have thrown thousands of pounds of taxpayers money at advisers, P.R. specialists and pseudo-political / commercial organisations, in a vain attempt to get what they want for their own needs – a new secondary school, right on their own doorstep for their own small clique of children, which they can then play at running, while thousands of local children lose their teachers, have to be taught in larger class groups and are restricted in the breadth of subjects that they can then study at GCSE level.

And Route 39’s arrogance doesn’t end there – in today’s planning meeting, a self-elected chair of governors, in trying to justify the schools viability, openly stated that they had ‘ran a community consultation and received 777 responses’. Route 39 didn’t tell the councillors how this so-called ‘consultation’ had been conducted, by offering free entry to the theme park to anyone that signed up ‘to find out more about Route 39’, or that the group had assiduously avoided any kind of public debate or independent consultation in order to present a false view of public demand and support. Furthermore, the speaker than went on to claim that ‘more staff at local schools supported Route 39 than opposed it’ – this is both disingenuous and rather rich considering that they have never even approached our secondary school teachers in order to ascertain whether the teaching staff support their concept or not!

According to reports, supporters of Route 39 in the public gallery, decked out in their lovely t-shirts emblazoned with the school motto ‘Engage-Respect-Aspire’ (again probably paid for with cash that should have been spent on educating children) were understandably shocked (after all it was a ‘done deal’, wasn’t it?) upset and quite hostile once the planning decision had been taken – not much respect on display then!

Conversely, and contrary to how the ‘Supporters of Route 39’ have painted them across the social media, the objectors behaved with quiet dignity, decorum and respect throughout the proceedings. Perhaps parents thinking of sending their impressionable little ones to Route 39 might like to ponder on this ‘life lesson’.

Route 39 are now telling their supporters that ‘Plan B’ has gone into effect. They have not said what ‘Plan B’ is, but don’t worry, everything will be absolutely fine and, according to their expensive website, “Our school WILL OPEN in September 2013”, in fact they are EMPHATIC about this. Ahem, haven’t you forgotten that inconvenient little thing called planning consent?

Now far be it from me to burst anyone’s ‘free school balloon’, but isn’t it about time that Route 39, its eclectic band of supporters and those individuals in government responsible for education got ‘real’ and started to understand that this whole fantasy/pantomime of theirs is actually harming the education of school children in our area. For me, that is truly the worst sin of all!