I would like to make a few comments about the letter that went out to parents this week.
The letter states that the governing body requested it. This is NOT true.
This website is not damaging to Marton School as Mr Lund suggests. The Head and the LEA are 'damaging' the school. People posting on here are trying to stop the damage becoming unrecoverable.
There are NOT 'clear lines of access and communication' with Marton. Mrs Coupe tries anything she can to avoid having meetings with parents. I know, it has happened to me on numerous occasions, and I have plenty of similar stories. And I have it on good authority that she has openly stated that the parents requesting information in writing are 'trouble makers'. How does this endear parents to contact the school?
And Mr Lund - I am sorry that some of us are too frightened to give our real names - but we are worried about the repercussions - look at the threats that Jane Veale has had to endure. There are no threats on this website.
mary
This is already posted under "Radiowave interview", but as it is relevant to Alan's post about David Lund's letter, I would like to post it here aswell.
I too would like to pick up on some points from Mr Lund’s letter, which my daughter received yesterday (in fact, I had to retrieve it from the bin, as she was so disgusted with the tone, which smacked of a damage limitation/brainwashing/PR exercise).
We are told that there are clear lines of access and communication (with Marton School). Do those clear lines now take a detour via Radiowave and the Gazette? If so, that explains why so many of us are still waiting for answers to questions asked weeks ago. Those answers must be stuck at Newsdesk Junction.
Mr Lund tells us that this is a challenging time for the school. I wonder if he has considered just how challenging the last year must have been for the suspended teacher, the teacher off with stress, the teacher who left with no job to go to, the member of support staff who was “moved” to another school without notice, the member of support staff off with stress, the governor removed from the governing body, the Chairman of Governors who resigned, the teachers still at the school who are too frightened to speak up for fear of repercussions, all their husbands and wives and children, the numerous parents who had to make the decision to move their children from a school they used to love, the children who had to move away from their friends and settle into new schools. Yes, Mr Lund, things have been challenging, but I certainly do not think Marton school is the biggest casualty in all this. The biggest casualties of this damage are all those mentioned above.
Mr Lund also talks of an “objective ofsted inspection team”. Is this the same ofsted team who have been challenged by several of us (still waiting for answers), the same team who have not had their contract renewed as they were not “value for money”, the same team who seemed to find a totally different school to the one inspected three months earlier by the LEA? If the ofsted team got it so right, then the LEA team must have got it so wrong. Perhaps they should be suspended for “professional differences”.
The website, set up as a parents’ forum, is described as “disturbing” and “damaging” to the school. Personally, I think that what has gone on in school and affected all those people mentioned above, is far more disturbing and damaging. The website was set up by parents as a last resort – our only means of communication, once all other avenues had been blocked. I can see why there were objections – free speech does not appear to be on the curriculum at Marton any more.
Finally, I would like to register my shock that a teacher was suspended for “professional differences over the educational vision for the school”. Suspended for a difference of opinion?? I taught in several schools over a thirty year period before I retired. Not only have I never taught in a school where a member of staff has been suspended, I have never been in a school where differences of opinion could not be resolved in a civilised and professional manner, and a compromise reached. I have certainly NEVER heard of a teacher being suspended over a difference of opinion. I can hardly believe it, although it does explain why I could not imagine why such an experienced and well-respected teacher was suspended at all.
I’m sorry Mr Lund, I have to agree with my daughter. This letter was a PR exercise. It might have worked if it had contained any evidence to back up your statements. Instead, it was totally lacking in substance and certainly did not fool me. Incidentally, was there really any need to send those letters through the post? It must have taken another chunk out of an already overstretched budget, judging by the supply cover I have seen in school…..
WAYNE HEYS
Letter from Mr Lund
For your information,I am currently awaiting a reply from Mr Lund,and (credit to him he has taken the time to reply) and it is also being sent through the post,I agree with many of the points you have made, particularly that the letter was nothing but a PR/damage limitation exercise, unfortunately this is not going to be sufficient,like I said previously,my children between them spent 9 wonderful years at the school,I would go and help coach the kids football skills (boys and girls) and took great pride out of their achievements,the school needs to be put back to a state that it was in July 04, I will not sit idly by and watch the school that I was very proud of fall by the wayside.
