Agenda item

PROPOSED ADMISSION NUMBER CHANGES AS PART OF THE PROPOSED ADMISSION ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE SEPTEMBER 2011 ROUND

To consider a report by the Chief Executive Education Leeds setting out details of the proposed admission number changes as part of the proposed admission arrangements for September 2011 round

 

(Report attached)

Minutes:

(Prior to any discussion on this item Councillor Harker declared a personal interest as a Member of the Executive Board which would considered the proposal around admission arrangements at a later date)

 

With reference to the last meeting of the Forum on 1st October 2009 when Members received a report setting out details of the proposed admission arrangements for the 2011 Admissions Round. The report indicated that proposed admission number changes for 2011, which form part of the admissions arrangements for 2011, would be available in November 2009.

 

The Chief Executive Education Leeds submitted a report  identifying the following Primary Schools which could increase their admission limit.

 

School

Current Admission Limit

Proposed Admission Limit

 

Primary

 

 

FarsleyFarfield Primary School

50

60

Valley View Primary

30

60

Windmill Primary

45

60

Clapgate Primary

45

60

Blackgates Primary

45

60

St Bartholomew’s CE Primary

60

75

Ryecroft Primary

30

60

Calverley CE Primary

45

60

Allerton CE Primary

45

60

West End Primary

30

60 (45)

Cross Gates Primary

30

60

Gildersome Primary

30

60

 

It was reported that the matter would be considered by the Executive Board in December 2009 when permission would be sought to consult on the permanent expansion of some of the above named schools. Assuming permission was granted then consultation would take place during January and February 2010, at the same time as the consultation on admission arrangements (and numbers).

 

Mrs Buckland, Head of Service, Admissions and Transport suggested that  Forum Members would also be aware that Education Leeds was also consulting on the permanent expansion of 17 primary schools for 2010. The Forum’s views were sought so that in reporting the outcome the Executive Board had full information on which to make a decision.

 

Mrs Buckland also reported that three High Schools within Pudsey had been written to; (Crawshaw, Grangefield and Priesthorpe) to enquire whether they wished to seek an increase in their admission limits. No  demographic need had been identified, the purpose in writing was to seek  the schools views.

 

In seeking clarification Mrs Bryan asked how the identified schools had been chosen?

In providing a response Mrs Buckland suggested that a number of factors had been taken into account: significant housing generation, an increase in the birth rate in a particular area, a local need, where a physical capacity to expand existed and where some schools could offer flexible solutions.

 

In terms of physical alterations to a school, the Chair asked at what stage would design details for the development be known, the Chair said he needed to be assured that the school had sufficient space for the expansion to work and that pupils would not be overcrowded into modular accommodation.

 

In responding Mrs Buckland said that design details would be known much later on in the process, only after the completion of the consultation process and following the submission of a report to the Executive Board would work on the detail begin.

 

In passing comment Councillor Harker said that if a school’s Board of Governors had expressed doubts as to whether Education Leeds could deliver what was required, that would be an issue for the Executive Board to take up

 

RESOLVED –

 

(i)  That no objections be raised to the proposed changes in admission numbers as part of the Admission Arrangements

 

(ii)  To note that permission was being sought to physically expand a number of the primary schools, as  identified in the submitted report.

Supporting documents: