‘Distracted’ governors and senior staff accused of putting Stalham High’s existence at risk as Ofsted puts school into special measures

Melinda Derry pictured in 2009 when she took over as headteacher at Stalham High School
. Melinda Derry pictured in 2009 when she took over as headteacher at Stalham High School .

Tuesday, February 4, 2014
8:21 AM

A Norfolk high school has been put into special measures eight months after it was judged as good by Ofsted.

To send a link to this page to a friend, you must be logged in.

Stalham High School on Brumstead Road was rated as inadequate in all four key areas following an unexpected inspection on November 26-27.

The damning report said Melinda Derry, headteacher at the time, was absent during the visit.

It was revealed that Ms Derry went off sick on November 26, according to Norfolk County Council, and on January 26 it was reported that she had resigned after being off ill for several weeks.

Her place has been taken, for the spring and summer terms, by executive headteacher Gerard Batty, who is currently head of Hellesdon High School, Norwich.

The damning Ofsted report said results in 2013 fell sharply, compared to exam achievement the previous year, and students had made poor progress especially in maths and science.

It added:

■ Students’ day-to-day experience of school is

not good enough. Some students are concerned about racist attitudes.

■ Governors and senior leaders have been too distracted by a number of internal issues. As a result, they have not made adequate plans for the long-term strategic improvement of the school and its existence has been put at risk; they have failed to win the complete confidence of parents, staff and all governors.

■ Particular groups of students make too little progress. These include lower ability students, some of whom are disabled or have special educational needs and boys, including more-able boys in some subjects.

■ Much teaching is inadequate and leadership of teaching is weak. Teachers do not set high enough expectations of what students should achieve and professional development of staff is having little impact on achievement.

■ The school leadership team is too small to have enough impact across the wide agenda of improvement priorities.

The four main areas which were inspected were achievement of pupils; quality of teaching; behaviour and safety of pupils; and leadership and management.

Inspectors said the school had not been able to sustain improvement after 2012 results showed a “considerable

improvement” in the proportion of students getting five or more GCSE grades of C or above, including English and maths. The figure in 2012 was 58pc.

The number of students achieving five or more GCSE subjects at grade C or higher including English and maths fell to 46pc last year.

Good points in the report included the majority of students were generally well behaved around school and with each other; the school had outstanding teaching in a few subject areas; recent additions to the management team had increased capacity for improving teaching; and persistent absence was being reduced.

For a full report, read tomorrow’s EDP.

47 comments

  • As others have said, this looks totally farcical when the two reports are compared- they may as well be talking about different schools as opposed to a school where the staff and leadership were almost totally unchanged. The second report also makes clear that the leaders had recognised the need to shore up the slt and had done so, so how is that not tackling issues? The first report says that there was good literacy provision, the second denies it exists! The first report says there is no inadequate teaching, the second that a fifth is inadequate. The first report says leadership is strong- the second, well how can that be with the same leaders???Steady improvements were being made from 2009 on but not far enough or fast enough. Also note that this school had not played the game of cheating league tables- no early entry and a traditional curriculum. This is nakedly political and it is disgusting to see committed professionals like the head and deputy being dragged through the mud when they seem to have been single handedly holding the fort for years! Also, is it any wonder that there were disgruntled staff when the head had been trying to tackle their performance?? This all stinks to high heaven.

    Report this comment

    wook

    Monday, February 3, 2014

  • Well Pauline if what you say is true, and in fact it is factually inaccurate in at least one place- (you should be more careful what you are insinuating about individuals too)- then it gives me even less faith in EITHER Ofsted judgement: if the future of a school can apparently be decided on the intervention of just one individual as opposed to all the other factors Ofsted consider then teachers may as well not be observed during ofsted at all, and students not interviewed etc etc- in fact they should save us all the stress and do the whole inspection in a secret room with a pile of data...

    Report this comment

    wook

    Monday, February 3, 2014

  • My son's school has recently been through an OFSTED inspection from which it didn't come out well. It too has had a number of internal staffing issues which the new head has sought to deal with. My own thoughts are that because head teachers report to untrained, volunteer school governors the system itself is flawed. Mr Gove should change the way governors are appointed so that head teachers are communicating with those who understand their particular issues as well as the issues of the wider working world. Only then will OFSTED be able to say that it's inspections truly back up the education system laid down by Gov.

    Report this comment

    Duncan AA

    Monday, February 3, 2014

  • I totally agree Lucioperca.....it is IMPOSSIBLE for both these reports to be accurate unless the sch staff and pupils are different in each report. It is ridiculous and really highlights just how inept Ofsted is. Come on EDP look into this.

    Report this comment

    Sportswagon

    Monday, February 3, 2014

  • I have been reading these comments with interest and would like to make an observation or two. I agree that this is not the place to be naming people who we believe may have acted improperly. On the other hand, I would point out that sometimes it can be very difficult to follow the 'proper' channels. I believe that's what the Stafford Hospital protesters tried to do initially, but were faced with years of inaction as well as threats and intimidation. It was only after things came into the public domain that action was finally taken and those protesters have now been shown to have acted in the public interest and honoured. I don't think it is right to suggest that another person has been defamatory or slanderous unless you have some reason to believe that they have lied. Indeed, if that person were truthful, could it not be libellous to call their comments bile? All we can hope to achieve in a forum such as this is to gauge a few different opinions. We must also bear in mind that some commenters may express strong views even though they may know little of what has gone on. As for me, although I don't work in a school I have been in a position that has meant I have spoken to several members of staff at Stalham High over recent years (both teaching and non-teaching) and I have also spoken to several governors. Some of those I have spoken to I would hold in very high regard, and some less so. Like everyone else, I make up my own mind about what I hear and I form my own opinion which is that there are many very serious questions that need to be answered about what has gone on at the school. Personally, I find some things unconscionable, and Ofsted's findings bear out that there are serious problems. I have not read any comments that suggest to me a crowing attitude, but everyone seems to want the school to move on and succeed, as do I. I would ask that people respect the view that to succeed, it may require big changes in the school and at least this will now be possible.

    Report this comment

    Lunaria

    Thursday, February 6, 2014

  • Ah Wook, there are a lot of things wrong in this world. It is only very occasionally that a wrong gets righted, as has been the case in the instance of Stalham High School and its self publicising "brilliant" former HT, previously one of a gang of Ofsted inspectors, who all went on to get comfortable jobs at senior level within NCC. And as for insinuation - the evidence is all there for anyone who wishes to take the time to check. Flag wavers like yourself are unable to follow that option though.

    Report this comment

    Pauline

    Monday, February 3, 2014

  • I'm in total agreement with you Namaste. I have a number of connections with SHS and only want the best for the school and its pupils. There are some very dedicated staff and I wish Mr Batty every success in his task of leading the school in the right direction.

    Report this comment

    Pauline

    Wednesday, February 5, 2014

  • Since when are all kids expected to leave school with the same results? It seems like those with ability are given less attention and support than those without.

    Report this comment

    KeithS

    Monday, February 3, 2014

  • Jaraucaria, I have a direct relationship with the school and witnessed many inappropriate events. These were all brought to the attention of NCC but were largely ignored until very recently, by which time the damage to the school and its pupils had been done. Melinda Derry and her Deputy were ineffectual in their leadership, but worse than that have misled others in their attempts to cover up their inappropriate behaviour. Both are tainted and neither should remain in order that the school be given the opportunity to recover quickly.

    Report this comment

    Pauline

    Tuesday, February 4, 2014

  • Pauline - As stated, I am a parent. What is your relationship to the school? Did you witness this alleged event yourself or is it hearsay? Do you have written evidence of it? If so, where? If it is in the public domain I would certainly like to see it - though I agree with Wook that, if true, it would actually serve to heap further doubt upon Ofsted's reliability.

    Report this comment

    Jaraucaria

    Tuesday, February 4, 2014

  • A 'gentle' threat......'careful, you are stepping on someones toes'....Sometimes the wheel turns full circle and then......ouch!

    Report this comment

    Rhombus

    Thursday, February 6, 2014

  • Perhaps one should add that T Cook is I believe a very competent Ofsted lead inspector who knows far more about schools than the so called muppets who get paid a fortune by Ofsted to inspect. Ofsted is useless and politicised........GET RID!!

    Report this comment

    Sportswagon

    Tuesday, February 4, 2014

  • Further to my previous missive, it's also worth pointing out that Melinda Derry had been in post since 2009 with no previous blot on her record at Stalham. She passed an Ofsted inspection based on 2012 performance and gets a good. So that makes at least 3 yrs of continuous good performance - so she cannot now be demonised as being a 'weak leader' from which this collapse pervaded. If she was that weak, how come her leadership got good scores in the previous 3 years. Something not right at all with this latest report - are they making a like comparison between the two reports? If I was in charge at Ofsted I would want both sets of inspectors to sit down with me and explain how they can arrive at such polarised conclusions in just 8 months.

    Report this comment

    Lucioperca

    Monday, February 3, 2014

  • Panksy-the previous report stated that the council advisory team had not provided constructive help and guidance for Stalham School despite it being accepted that the school was having problems . I accept that some small secondary comprehensives are doing OK-and Alderman Peel if I remember correctly is one of the few which has been consistently good for well over a decade. I note that for some subject the exam results are in the lower regions of the league tables though. I still feel it is harder for a school to deliver effective teaching. If it can only afford classes or sets of thirty pupils and has four hundred pupils and three mainstream sets for each subject the ability range in each could represent around 30-33 % of the intake-whereas when there were grammar schools of the same size each stream would have had a much narrower ability range. Work it out- if only 15-20% of kids went to grammar school then kids capable of 10 As were not being taught along side those who might struggle to get a C. In a larger comprehensive there can be a narrower ability range in each set. I also wonder whether some children would benefit from a change in the members of their school year-being at school with the same children from age 3 to age 16 , children who might also be neighbours,does not give kids much chance to make new pals nor break away from unsatisfactory friendships Mind you, if they were on school buses longer there would be more opportunity for Ofsted to pick up on hearsay about out of school behaviour. Goodness knows what they would have made of what we got up to on Eastern counties buses on the way home from school.

    Report this comment

    Daisy Roots

    Tuesday, February 4, 2014

  • I too am left very curious as to why some commenters here are so happy to throw around dark hints of insider knowledge and make very unguarded accusations, yet so strangely coy about where it was gleaned or what their relation to the school is- making unpleasant remarks with zero sense of responsibility is a feature of the internet though, I suppose.

    Report this comment

    wook

    Tuesday, February 4, 2014

  • I know this school. My children go there. I am very happy with it and so are most other parents. The report does not sound anything like the school I know. But then, as 'Lucioperca' correctly pointed out, in spite of the fact that they require teachers to do so, Ofsted don't appear to feel bound to report with logic or proper evidence. The report is full of inconsistencies. Just one being that 'although teaching was at least good in half the lessons observed, overall it has not inspired students or raised expectations'. 1. how are those in any meaningful way, measurable? and 2. the teaching was good or better, according to Ofsted's own standards, in half the lessons - and yet, the quality of teaching is graded 4 ie. inadequate? In what statistical cloud cuckoo land would this stand up? It would achieve an ungraded if presented as an answer at GCSE. As 'Morris' and 'Lucioperca' both rightly point out, either this report - or that from eight months ago - is wrong. It was the same Senior Management team through both. What is being done about that? Can Ofsted carry authority in assessing a school's performance when it cannot get to grips with its own?

    Report this comment

    Jaraucaria

    Monday, February 3, 2014

  • I suggest that people re-read my comments about 'flagwavers' then re-read the Ofsted report. Justice has been served. There are still some substantial outstanding complaints against Melinda Derry, which themselves might yet make the EDP.

    Report this comment

    Pauline

    Tuesday, February 4, 2014

  • Pendragon - Thanks. I reply that if a poster can't be specific about evidence - then they ought not to be specific about names and accusations. It is called defamation. If made against me, I would consider certain posts (now rightly removed by the EDP) to be actionable and I would like to remind posters that, in such cases, their presumption of anonymity because they have posted under a nom de plume is not legally guaranteed. Pauline - I rest my case.

    Report this comment

    Jaraucaria

    Wednesday, February 5, 2014

  • I have had the misfortune to get involved in helping to draft a response to an Ofsted report and I can tell you all that the whole inspection process is a farce. Teachers have to justify everything on 'evidence-based' measures, exam results, lesson plans, attendance figures etc etc the list goes on and on. However, these reports often make very glib, damning and sweeping generalisations that are not backed up with any fact or detail or direct observational evidence within the report itself. So its very hard to kick-back at some of the negative points that get made. Most of the report content is the circumspect opinion of the guy who is doing the inspection on the given day, someone who has usually been out of teaching circles for 5 year or more and who has lost touch with the direct realities and issues teachers face today. There are lots of soft and fluffy 'politically correct' phrases and suggestions when what is actually needed is direct, frank and forthright guidance. The whole schools reporting systems is wrong. Someone makes the point how can a school go from Good to Special Measures in 8 months .... it can't !! Either the original inspection was fundamentally flawed or this one is. This debacle should set worrying alarm bells ringing within OfSted as it makes a mockery of their own inspection process, why didn't they identify these weaknesses on the first report, after 8 months it will largely be the same set of pupils so how did they decscend into such poor achievers, how had they suddenly forgotten all their previous years teaching? It just doesn't add up and smells of a hidden agenda if you ask me.

    Report this comment

    Lucioperca

    Monday, February 3, 2014

  • What a farce Ofsted is. ........ did it get it wrong 8 months ago or is this report wrong? NO WAY can all these elements go from a GOOD to SPECIAL MEASURES in 8 months. All too politicised of course......no wonder head teacher vacancies can't be filled with this discredited body attacking schools for political reasons. Did u read the press this weekend?

    Report this comment

    Sportswagon

    Monday, February 3, 2014

  • Current odds are:- 5-4 Fav = TEN Group Evens = Ormiston 100-1 = Inspiration Trust Roll up, roll up. Where are you going to place your bets folks?

    Report this comment

    TheTruth

    Tuesday, February 4, 2014

  • DuncanAA, as a governor myself I agree with some of your comments, however there is no reason for any governor to be untrained. There is a comprehensive training programme organised by governor services which all governors have access to if their schools subscribe to governor support. The trouble with the system is that the training is not mandatory so although a Chair of Governors can encourage their colleagues to do training, they cannot force them. There also needs to be more honesty about the level of commitment required from governors if they are going to be effective. It's not an easy role to fulfil if you are working, but if you are really committed you can find a way. Fortunately It is now easier to have more control over who joins the governing body, so you ensure you are getting people with the right motives and skills. The system isn't perfect but I would hesitate to say that wholesale change is required; given the initiatives currently coming out of the DfE I shudder to think what Mr Gove would replace the existing governance system with!

    Report this comment

    Row71

    Monday, February 3, 2014

  • "Governors and senior leaders have been too distracted by a number of internal issues...." If they cant multitask, then there is something wrong and they should all be sacked.

    Report this comment

    "V"

    Tuesday, February 4, 2014

  • Pauline....no wonder u are so anti-Ms Derry....she had great courage in tackling and sacking useless teachers but of course she can't respond to these awful attacks on her.....doubtless u r one of these ex-teachers.

    Report this comment

    Sportswagon

    Wednesday, February 5, 2014

  • Ah Wook, there are a lot of things wrong in this world. It is only very occasionally that a wrong gets righted, as has been the case in the instance of Stalham High School and its self publicising "brilliant" former HT, previously one of a gang of Ofsted inspectors, who all went on to get comfortable jobs at senior level within NCC. And as for insinuation - the evidence is all there for anyone who wishes to take the time to check. Flag wavers like yourself are unable to follow that option though.

    Report this comment

    Pauline

    Monday, February 3, 2014

  • Further to my previous missive, it's also worth pointing out that Melinda Derry had been in post since 2009 with no previous blot on her record at Stalham. She passed an Ofsted inspection based on 2012 performance and gets a good. So that makes at least 3 yrs of continuous good performance - so she cannot now be demonised as being a 'weak leader' from which this collapse pervaded. If she was that weak, how come her leadership got good scores in the previous 3 years. Something not right at all with this latest report - are they making a like comparison between the two reports? If I was in charge at Ofsted I would want both sets of inspectors to sit down with me and explain how they can arrive at such polarised conclusions in just 8 months.

    Report this comment

    Lucioperca

    Monday, February 3, 2014

  • Funny sort of justice isn't it, when staff and students have to go through the nightmare of special measures and yet another school is made ripe for academy chains. Funny sort of justice when the school was poised to move forwards with good new staff appointed and the leadership at last at capacity and now it's two steps back. Funny old world when people can grind their axes in public without accountability. When a small group of disgruntled people can work behind the scenes to destabilise the community school and then gloat about it, that's not justice of any kind.

    Report this comment

    wook

    Tuesday, February 4, 2014

  • When the Head goes off sick the day OFSTED arrive you know things aren't looking good. Can a school go from good to special measures in 8 months? Yes of course. Why couldn't it? Strong leadership = good schools. It's as simple as that. Get the right Head in who means business and everyone falls in line. Pupils, Teachers, Parents, Governors. I'm glad the mediocre, coasting, complacent schools are getting a kick up the proverbial. You only get one chance at an education and pupils deserve better.

    Report this comment

    a fine city

    Monday, February 3, 2014

  • Its interesting to see your comment about small schools again Daisy! You mention the stick but appears you like to waive it too. Not all small schools fail. Alderman Peel is a very successful small school. Very large schools do not suit all students and can also fail. With the right Leadership and Governance Stalham could become successful, there was evidence of outstanding teaching and best practice needs to be applied to those failing. If you read the full report, significant support was provided by NCC so where did this go wrong? It would be interesting to know what the 'distractions' where. Ofsted state there was a high turnover of Governors, why was this? I really hope for the Stalham Community and StaffStudents that this school can be turned around.

    Report this comment

    Panksy

    Monday, February 3, 2014

  • I too am left very curious as to why some commenters here are so happy to throw around dark hints of insider knowledge and make very unguarded accusations, yet so strangely coy about where it was gleaned or what their relation to the school is- making unpleasant remarks with zero sense of responsibility is a feature of the internet though, I suppose.

    Report this comment

    wook

    Tuesday, February 4, 2014

  • You are the voice of reason, Lunaria. Interesting that certain commenters are keen to brand me and others as troublemakers. I have no concerns about litigation whatsoever, as I have told the truth. Anonymity is a useful tool - it is likely that the three main flagwavers for Melinda Derry are either close personal friends, members of her family or maybe Melinda herself....in which case, I'd expect nothing less! However, the external evidence is clear - the management of the school has failed the pupils, the staff and the local community. That failure was not solely down to ineptitude, it centred around inappropriate and unprofessional behaviour by the Headteacher and the Governing Body, hence the removal of both.

    Report this comment

    Pauline

    Thursday, February 6, 2014

  • Pauline - Thank you for your response but I ask again, did you witness the particular event which you related? Do you have any evidence for us other than your assertion that it occurred? If no notice was taken, perhaps that was because your allegations were not credible. From what you have come up with so far, this would not surprise me. Without your being willing to say directly what your relationship with the school is, and to show concrete evidence to back up your allegations, I feel quite sure that people reading this will be no more inclined to believe your story than I am.

    Report this comment

    Jaraucaria

    Tuesday, February 4, 2014

  • Exactly my thoughts about the potentially slanderous comments made here. However, what is worse than the naming of individuals is the crowing attitude of people who obviously have personal axes to grind- what kind of 'justice' is it to crow over a school being put into special measures? Only someone who has never worked in a school in special measures, or had their children educated in a school in special measures, would be idiot enough to suggest that Stalham High's staff and students deserved that in any way. Now watch as the school loses pupils, staff go into capability or good, committed, staff crack under the stress, and see the acdemy vultures gather. And if you though the previous head and governors were distracted, see what happens when they're in non stop academisation meetings. Finally, in a few year's time perhaps, drive past the building site where there was once an improving community school now given over to a housing association. Pauline, Namaste, that's where your bile got the local community, its students and its workers- but don't let that stop you building your pyre on Stalham Rec

    Report this comment

    wook

    Wednesday, February 5, 2014

  • You are the voice of reason, Lunaria. Interesting that certain commenters are keen to brand me and others as troublemakers. I have no concerns about litigation whatsoever, as I have told the truth. Anonymity is a useful tool - it is likely that the three main flagwavers for Melinda Derry are either close personal friends, members of her family or maybe Melinda herself....in which case, I'd expect nothing less! However, the external evidence is clear - the management of the school has failed the pupils, the staff and the local community. That failure was not solely down to ineptitude, it centred around inappropriate and unprofessional behaviour by the Headteacher and the Governing Body, hence the removal of both.

    Report this comment

    Pauline

    Thursday, February 6, 2014

  • Well done Pauline, Justice has been done!! Now the school needs support to move on led by Mr Batty. There are some good, committed teachers at Stalham High and students who need encouragement so let us concentrate on ensuring that happens. In time, many will reflect on what should have been done differently.

    Report this comment

    namaste

    Wednesday, February 5, 2014

  • Those here who wonder why some commenters aren't being specific about certain matters should be aware that readers' comments are subject to moderation.

    Report this comment

    Pendragon

    Tuesday, February 4, 2014

  • Its interesting to see your comment about small schools again Daisy! You mention the stick but appears you like to waive it too. Not all small schools fail. Alderman Peel is a very successful small school. Very large schools do not suit all students and can also fail. With the right Leadership and Governance Stalham could become successful, there was evidence of outstanding teaching and best practice needs to be applied to those failing. If you read the full report, significant support was provided by NCC so where did this go wrong? It would be interesting to know what the 'distractions' where. Ofsted state there was a high turnover of Governors, why was this? I really hope for the Stalham Community and StaffStudents that this school can be turned around.

    Report this comment

    Panksy

    Monday, February 3, 2014

  • I'm in total agreement with you Namaste. I have a number of connections with SHS and only want the best for the school and its pupils. There are some very dedicated staff and I wish Mr Batty every success in his task of leading the school in the right direction.

    Report this comment

    Pauline

    Wednesday, February 5, 2014

  • This saga of two illogically conflicting reports is a classic example of the dictator's dictum "Do it again until you come up with the right answer." Of course no one has actually issued such orders to be followed it's simply that the henchmen know what's good for them and their careers. The victims? -not their problem is it? -move on quickly to the next target, all the easier to put them out of mind.

    Report this comment

    guella

    Monday, February 3, 2014

  • Well, having read the report I find a worrying amount of hearsay -all schools being inspected must now be worried about what their pupils are up to once out of school! One wonders if Stalham parents have anything to say about this or whether it is a small group with a mission to hand ofsted a stick to beat the school. All the other problems, in my opinion could have been avoided if the head had been given appropriate support by NCC and would be best resolved by closing the school, which is far too small, and allocating the pupils to Martham Wroxham and North Walsham. I am curious, and the report did not throw any light on the matter, as to why the school has a higher than average percentage of children with disabilities and special needs

    Report this comment

    Daisy Roots

    Monday, February 3, 2014

  • Interesting... If you want to get to the truth you need a full investigation using freedom of information which should send many of them scurrying for cover.

    Report this comment

    namaste

    Monday, February 3, 2014

  • Ofstead's mission is to make academies, not giver good reports.

    Report this comment

    Henry the cat

    Monday, February 3, 2014

  • Not sure why this was removed but... Pauline - As stated, I am a parent. What is your relationship to the school? Did you witness this alleged event yourself or is it hearsay? Do you have written evidence of it? If so, where? If it is in the public domain I would certainly like to see it - though I agree with Wook that, if true, it would actually serve to heap further doubt upon Ofsted's reliability.

    Report this comment

    Jaraucaria

    Tuesday, February 4, 2014

  • Ofsted received a complaint about the school and that is one of the reasons it returned so soon. It says this in the report

    Report this comment

    Jacob Burns

    Tuesday, February 4, 2014

  • Daisy Roots - Personally, I believe there are compensations for children in smaller schools, as well as disadvantages. A smaller community, for example. Some children can't cope with large comprehensives. I hated mine. However, that aside, something is always missed in the 'Great Grades Comparison' and it is that smaller schools are at a disadvantage anyway, where fluctuations are the red rag to the Ofsted bull. This factor is about statistical weighting and is independent of teaching or learning. Having a smaller statistical sample always means that the performance or not of a single child weighs far more heavily in a small school than in a large one. Though this is obvious when one thinks about it, it is never factored into league tables or Ofsted's calculations and therefore, I would guess, rarely into the public's perception. Where a child in a year group of 100 weighs 3 times more than a child in a year group of 300, this means that large schools can actually slip in performance a lot more than smaller ones before anyone gets up in arms. I would add to this that most sizes of sample which Ofsted use would be considered far too small to be usable by a statistician. I like your observation about the school bus, though!

    Report this comment

    Jaraucaria

    Tuesday, February 4, 2014

  • Further to my previous missive, it's also worth pointing out that Melinda Derry had been in post since 2009 with no previous blot on her record at Stalham. She passed an Ofsted inspection based on 2012 performance and gets a good. So that makes at least 3 yrs of continuous good performance - so she cannot now be demonised as being a 'weak leader' from which this collapse pervaded. If she was that weak, how come her leadership got good scores in the previous 3 years. Something not right at all with this latest report - are they making a like comparison between the two reports? If I was in charge at Ofsted I would want both sets of inspectors to sit down with me and explain how they can arrive at such polarised conclusions in just 8 months.

    Report this comment

    Lucioperca

    Monday, February 3, 2014

  • Pauline - Thank you for your response but I ask again, did you witness the particular event which you related? Do you have any evidence for us other than your assertion that it occurred? If no notice was taken, perhaps that was because your allegations were not credible. From what you have come up with so far, this would not surprise me. Without your being willing to say directly what your relationship with the school is, and to show concrete evidence to back up your allegations, I feel quite sure that people reading this will be no more inclined to believe your story than I am.

    Report this comment

    Jaraucaria

    Tuesday, February 4, 2014

The views expressed in the above comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this site

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Norfolk Weather

Partly Cloudy

Partly Cloudy

max temp: 17°C

min temp: 9°C

Five-day forecast

loading...

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT