Early Lent Half Term

[dinahcat]

Are you saying westguncopse that the children who live outside of Sussex are in fact a bit annoying because they live far away? The school advertises as full boarding and that is what the parents sign up to with all its faults.When you make decisions about travel arrangements and changes of holidays or similar you ave to take all the parenst into account. The fact that many parents seem to comprise of those who live close enough to take their children out every weekend or attend weekend fixtures doesn't mean that the other parents should be discriminated against by arrangements which suit only those who live in or near the school.It does not say anywhere in the literature that I can see, that it is far better if you live near the school as you can take your children home as often as possible. It says all children are expected board . If what you suggest is true and that most parents would favour weekly boarding (and what parent really wants their chilren away from them) then you are suggesting that the school would be entirely made up from local children who live near enough to go home every weekend. What do you do if you have a bright child and no grammars and no independent near enough which offers bursaries and scholarships. Oh yes, that must be what CH is about . Those children.

[icomefromalanddownunder]

Why - essentially because that is what parents today want. Parents live closer to CH and sociey has changed. Parents want to see their children! Shock Horror

That is absolutely no different from the 60s. Our parents wanted to see us, but felt that the school knew best, and that since they were offering us such a great education and such great opportunities at such a bargain basement price, it was worth the sacrifice of not seeing us as much as they would have liked.

They also demand higher standards of care (as do the Social Services and OFSTED). What I saw when I first arrived at CH (Open Dorms, Metal Beds, Lav Ends etc) would now be illegal now. Hence all boarding schools have had to spend millions on refurbishment - even down to the number of toilets per person or bedspace per person.

Open dorms and metal beds illegal? Why?????????????

.

There's a whole lot more I would write if I could be bothered, but my fundamental point is that parents/staff/whoever seem to want the best of both worlds: luxury living at the expense of the State or benefactors. I do not believe that this is right or equitable, but a cup of coffee is preferable to continuing my rant.

[englishangel]

Not just Social Services and Ofsted, in the rented sector no more than four people (and in some places no more than two) are allowed to share WC and washing facilities unless they are family.

[KenHo]

Changing CH to weekly boarding would, over time, destroy much of what it has going for it. Of course, initially, they would say that they will have full boarding but this would eventually go as well. The full boarding will eventually disappear under such a system because it will only be used by a minoriy and so will be expensive to keep going.

We live a considerable distance from CH and understood when we applied that CH were trying to encourage more children nationally. I also assumed that most other children would be from the deprived parts of London, but in my limited experience is that this isn't really the case. In this thread we are told that the majority live within 20 miles of the school now. Is it really a good idea that school set up for needy children in the City should mainly serve the middle classes of Sussex and Surrey? With weekly boarding this would certainly be mostly the case.

[Jade]

Does anyone know if the rules might change? I would love my DS to come home every weekend. If I were aloud to pick him up after Saturday classes and bring him back on Sunday evening, that would be brilliant. Bring on the change.

[jhopgood]

Taken from the 2008/2009 Annual Review of CH

Pupils Sept 2008 Residential Area

London 33%
West Sussex 25%
Surrey/Hants 10%
Home Counties 8%
East Sussex 6%
Middlesex 5%
West and South West 5%
Kent 4%
Midlands 1%
Anglia 1%
North 1%
Overseas 1%

Whilst it appears to me that more come from local homes than in JR´s and my time, (at the expense, I would guess, of London), the majority would appear to live more than 20 miles away.
Of the seven who entered Barnes B in 1959, one was from the Isle of Wight, one from the West Country, two from Middlesex and three from London (Streatham, Shooter´s Hill and Eltham).
I can remember being surprised when I discovered that someone was from Horsham, as it made no sense to me going to a Boarding School if you lived in walking distance.
I realise times have changed, but the CH mission has not, so one should expect most parent´s having difficulty in changing travel plans at short notice.

[Richard Ruck]

Has anyone considered the views of the pupils in all this?

As a teenager at CH, I was quite happy to spend the weekends indulging in sport, music, and generally hanging around with my friends. Particularly as I got older, I felt absolutely no need to run home to my mother at every available opportunity. Not that I didn't love her (still do, in fact), but I suppose it's normal to want to loosen the 'apron strings' at that age.

CH has always promoted itself on the unique advantages offered by a fully-boarding education. If parents don't want this, then they should just look elsewhere.

Times have indeed changed, though, and if social and financial pressures are indeed conspiring to make fundamental change unavoidable, then perhaps it's time for this message to be conveyed a little more openly. Most Old Blues are aware that the Foundation and School need to keep on raising funds, but the sum of £75m has now been mentioned.

How can the powers that be let people know how serious the situation is becoming, but without causing unwarranted panic?
Tricky one.....

[J.R.]

The is a Leave Weekend every third weekend that starts on Friday and ends on Sunday night. So it goes Sunday night arrive at start of term, Sunday at School, Sunday at School, Leave Weekend, Sunday at School, Sunday at School Half Term (one week - except for Mich term which is two weeks) ...... Easter is a week longer than most State Schools - Christmas about the same and Summer 2/3 weeks longer.

When I first came to CH in 1995 there were only leave days (Sat?). That was abolished for a Sat/Sun and then Fri/Sat/Sun.

Why - essentially because that is what parents today want. Parents live closer to CH and sociey has changed. Parents want to see their children! Shock Horror

They also demand higher standards of care (as do the Social Services and OFSTED). What I saw when I first arrived at CH (Open Dorms, Metal Beds, Lav Ends etc) would now be illegal now. Hence all boarding schools have had to spend millions on refurbishment - even down to the number of toilets per person or bedspace per person.

The biggest problem is full boarding IMHO. This is not popular with many potential parents ( who may have worthy, needy children). I (as a teacher at CH) would not send my children to boarding school at age 11 (13 possibly - 16 happily) unless it were imperative (i.e. Army/Major Family issues etc). That is my opinion by the way and clearly not shared by the parents who do! Interestingly today I had a chat with a House Master who agreed with me and three of his children came to CH as Day Boarders.

Weekly boarding is different. Hard working parents can send their child to a school Sunday to Sat knowing that they will see them on Sat night/Sunday. Why some OBs think this is odd or potential disastrous to CH and its ethos is a mystery to me. Full Boarding would remain an OPTION for those who wanted it but most would not IMHO.

This would make CH more attractive to parents, improve the quality of our intake and encourage more parents with money to apply. I know that is a dirty word to some, but truly, the CH model of the past is not sustainable anymore. We can die a slow death or adapt. Protect the majority of foundation places but stop pretending that we can carry on regardless. We are losing money hand over fist at the moment - scary amounts - mind boggling. Most schools would have closed by now!

Enjoy the memories but stop pretending - OR - all the Old Blues can pitch up the £75m we need to sustain ourselves! We need MAJOR investment.

Thanks for the detailed reply Ian.

In our day, I don't think parents had ANY say in the running of the school. Once their dear little boy walked through the gates of CH, they BELONGED to CH until the term end.

£75 million, ey ?

Well, we have just got a £25 million lottery winner in leafy Dorking, but I can't see him or his family flashing any cash down Sussex way, and I'm afraid that on my pittance of a pension, we just about survive ! I'm thinking of changing our surname to RutlINSKI. Apparently, Eastern European sounding surnames elicit the best of everything from H.M.G.

(I'll fetch me coat, if someone orders me taxi !)

[ailurophile]

onewestguncopse wrote

The biggest problem is full boarding IMHO. This is not popular with many potential parents ( who may have worthy, needy children). I (as a teacher at CH) would not send my children to boarding school at age 11 (13 possibly - 16 happily) unless it were imperative (i.e. Army/Major Family issues etc). That is my opinion by the way and clearly not shared by the parents who do! Interestingly today I had a chat with a House Master who agreed with me and three of his children came to CH as Day Boarders.

Weekly boarding is different. Hard working parents can send their child to a school Sunday to Sat knowing that they will see them on Sat night/Sunday. Why some OBs think this is odd or potential disastrous to CH and its ethos is a mystery to me. Full Boarding would remain an OPTION for those who wanted it but most would not IMHO.

This would make CH more attractive to parents, improve the quality of our intake and encourage more parents with money to apply. I know that is a dirty word to some, but truly, the CH model of the past is not sustainable anymore. We can die a slow death or adapt. Protect the majority of foundation places but stop pretending that we can carry on regardless. We are losing money hand over fist at the moment - scary amounts - mind boggling. Most schools would have closed by now!

Enjoy the memories but stop pretending - OR - all the Old Blues can pitch up the £75m we need to sustain ourselves! We need MAJOR investment.

Crikey! There are so many controversial statements here that it's hard to know where to start...

Let's take full boarding. It is interesting to hear that Ian and other staff would not send their children to boarding school at 11. But then of course, they haven't had to, being able to enjoy all the benefits of a subsidised CH education without needing to agonise about full boarding. And notice that little word ''need"; isn't that what CH is meant to be about? Most parents choose CH, or more accurately are chosen by CH, because their children have a need (educational, social or emotional) which cannot be met in their home circumstances. In accepting a place at CH parents have presumably decided that full boarding is, on balance, a better option for their child than the alternatives. The suggestion that staff, and House Masters in particular, cannot understand or sympathise with this choice is more than a little worrying.

I now move onto 'This [weekly boarding] would make CH more attractive to parents, improve the quality of our intake and encourage more parents with money to apply'. Improve the quality of intake?!!! Exactly what is wrong with the 'quality' of the current intake? Let's not forget that CH is currently oversusbcribed by a factor of five, so I'd guess that the intake is..., well, what they've chosen to take in. And judging by results, not only academic but also on the charming, articulate, well rounded young people the school produces, I'd defend the quality of that choice anywhere.

Sadly, the end of Ian's statement seems to suggest that quality now equates to the size of your parent's wallet, and that that's the only way in which CH can manage to survive; "...and encourage more parents with money to apply. I know that is a dirty word to some, but truly, the CH model of the past is not sustainable anymore. We can die a slow death or adapt. Protect the majority of foundation places but stop pretending that we can carry on regardless.". I'm somewhat baffled by the claim that it might be possible to 'protect the majority of foundation places' while at the same time building a new model reliant on increasing the number of full fee payers - aren't the two models mutually exclusive? To me, the choice looks more like that between a slow death or a quick death! If CH turns itself into just another independent school chasing a dwindling supply of wealthy parents (and Ian has said elsewhere that these are all looking for 'the best deal'!) then there's a real danger that it will no longer be CH - or not in any meaningfully recognizable form.

And finally... "We are losing money hand over fist at the moment - scary amounts - mind boggling. Most schools would have closed by now! Enjoy the memories but stop pretending - OR - all the Old Blues can pitch up the £75m we need to sustain ourselves! We need MAJOR investment ." Well we keep hearing this. Yet less than 18 months ago the then Clerk published a bullish article in the Times Online claiming that CH's £300m endowment would enable the school to weather the recession for a good two years, and to continue expanding its charitable mission into the future. http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/b ... 010356.ece

What's gone wrong?

[J.R.]

I have to admit, somewhat sadly, that I totally agree with Joanne's, (ailurophile ), comments above.

We are going back to what older OB's mean when they refer to the 'ethos' of Christ's Hospital.

Yes - We all accept that times are hard, but I have to wonder why certain financially well-off parents wish to send their off-spring to CH when they could opt for Eton, Harrow or Rugby.

Could it be that they just don't quite meet the social requirements of those schools ?

I was recently led to believe that there is NO class distinction in this country anymore !

YEAH, RIGHT !!

[Foureyes]

One way the school could help itself would be by being seen to be economising a little. For example, was it really necessary to send 56 (approx) pupils plus ten adults to Australia for 23 days? This must have cost an arm-and-a-leg. It doesn't matter where the money came from, whether BSB, parental contributions, almoners donations, the Amicables, fund-raising events, or whatever, the fact is that it was seen to be a hugely expensive undertaking on an enormous scale. I know from friends in Australia that those who saw the party over there are convinced that C.H. must be a very, very wealthy school with very, very wealthy parents, to fund such an undertaking.
I am sure that supporters will produce a host of reasons why it was a "good thing" but that just won't wash. The money could have been much better spent on educating more children at the school. The school needs £75 million? Fine. But in that case stay closer to home and be seen to be being more careful with what funds you do have.

[cstegerlewis]

OWGC, as an employee of the school I would have hoped you have read the financial repot of the foundation http://www.christs-hospital.org.uk/fina ... 008-09.pdf which shows that although the endowment funds are under the inevitable pressure of the current financial crisis, and there will have to be some cost reductions (as there are everywhere at the moment) the funding is still relatively healthy, and the 75m quoted is somewhat alarmist. I am sure the foundation would not say no to that sort of donation though

[Foureyes]

cstergerlewis says "the funding is still relatively healthy, and the 75m quoted is somewhat alarmist."
I was at a meeting last week and can assure you that the powers-that-be do not agree with you!

PS. Please explain OWGC.

[AKAP]

OWGC=Onewestguncopse (I think).

[dinahcat]

Back to the original topic , if I may ,even though I am enjoying the digression, I have just been told by the offspring that I have to take all their stuff home at half term as the rooms will be needed for the assessmentees to stay in . AAAAIIIIEEEEE!
I have three at the school with a car that can just about take two with stuff. I have to pay someone else to fetch them at the end of term now as they can't fit in the car I have. They can't do the half term trip as it is a Friday and so would have to take a day off work. It's a three hour round trip so I can't do it twice. Seriously, any suggestions anyone? I get that the snow was no one's fault but I don't know what to do.