Becomming a New Dep

[icomefromalanddownunder]

Others may well agree with me.

I do! (with bells on)

PS for Nastymum:

I don't have a raspberrymoticon, but resort to the chorus of a song I heard Billy C perform many years ago:

I would have sent you a letter
But I couldn't spell (sound of raspberry being blown)
And that's all I have to say.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[J.R.]

If you do that I might reconsider. Others may well agree with me.

Thanks Andy.

You've saved me a lot of typing.

Kimchi obviously has NO respect for his/her elders.

Me-thinks a spell in Afghanistan or Iraq might temper his/her attitude to life.

[englishangel]

Someone once said if you are not left wing at 18 you have no heart, and if you are not right wing at 50 you have no head.

I don't think it was Tony Benn but you get my drift.

[Jo]

Don't know which of the various possible threads to put this, so have taken pot luck.

My impression of Kimchi is that he/she is very young, very angry, and has absolutely no clue about how to enlist support. Still, the Facebook group made interesting reading. I very much felt their sense of outrage, they feel bereft of the warm atmosphere that surrounded the previous Head, and are all adrift and angry. I'm sure I'd have felt the same at their age. Some of them sincerely want to do something constructive, but clearly there are also a bunch of immature whiners jumping on the bandwagon.

However...... just because I empathise doesn't necessarily mean I support them. I think the mature thing to do would be for a small deputation to try and meet with the Head to discuss their concerns. Then at least if that fails and they have to resort to other methods, they can say they tried. I'm sure someone will have drawn his attention to the Facebook group by now anyway. I get the impression that however reasonable they are trying to appear, they are too angry for reasoned conversation.

Without being there, it's difficult to know whether there is any justification. Two different parents on the forum have presented alternative views. Is the pastoral care really suffering? There are no specific examples quoted: the only things I picked up on were clamping down on drinking and smoking, cutting back on discos, spending an evening in house, and the Grecians not being able to march with their houses. My instinctive reaction, particularly to the last point, was "good grief, grow up and get a life!!!" but maybe it's more significant than I appreciate.

My guess is that John Franklin is in no way intending to undermine the pastoral side and reduce the school to an exam factory, but that maybe he is not communicating the reasons for some of his actions very well, particularly to the pupils. I remember when Miss Tucker replaced Miss West - even though she on the whole relaxed some of the older rules, there was still some hostility towards her (including from me) simply because she was different, and we felt we out-CH'ed her because she was new and we were the old hands.

I agree with everyone who has questioned the "only at CH because they have nowhere else to go" statement. How weird. I never, ever felt that. I could have gone to one of the local grammar schools, and I wasn't being shoved away because I was dysfunctional. It was simply that a good education, in an academically rigorous institution, was available at an affordable price at CH.

Now I've woffled on long enough, and I'm not sure I've said anything useful anyway. I hope it all resolves itself peacefully with a bit of give and take on both sides.

[Mid A 15]

I looked at the link as Carong appeared sympathetic to the cause and must say that the arbitary decision to cut the Rock Concert and ban anyone from performing other than Grecians, despite all the rehearsal time it appears younger pupils put in, seems very harsh on the face of it.

It would seem more reasonable to advise pupils the concert is Grecian only BEFORE the rehearsal process not shortly before the performance is due to take place.

My own children have participated in such events and I know how much effort is put in. I can fully understand the sense of disappointment and frustration at suddenly being told you are not allowed to perform.

I realise there are two sides to every story and would be interested if anybody can firstly confirm the truth of this allegation and secondly, if indeed true, justify why this was done.

[Eruresto]

I must say that there are several JRF groups on Face, and of them all, this is by far the most constructive. Two others that spring to mind are mere hate groups; however, the creator of this has thoughtfully and maturely written out an explanation for his displeasure, which while I do not entirely agree with I nonetheless laud for its sensible approach. However, Kimchi seems not to be among the caliber of the creator (who I am deliberately not naming in case he wishes to remain anonymous outside of FB), and would seem to prefer the other Hate Groups - again, I won't dignify them with naming them.

I have joined, because in the group they are putting forward some constructive ideas, such as a forum for explaining what their problems are. These are contained clearly and simply on a separate list, and some of them are reasonable, such as the commonplace nature of cards (which is serving simply to degrade the serious nature of a card, which now means next to nothing in the eyes of its recipient), and the abolition of bedrest. Whilst I disagree with others (read = most), such as the lack of cheering in Assembly and the steeper punishments for alcohol and smoking, a good deal of intelligent discussion is coming forth, which, should these people decide to consult actively with the SMT instead of brooding their anger on the net, could well do some good - even if it is merely to explain clearly the reasons behind the rules, which seem not to be apparent to most of the populace.

[kimchi]

I'm not sure why I'm bothering to post this, maybe I'm just a young rebel who needs the imagination beaten out of him/herself.

J.R.: Nothing like a bit of military discipline, eh? Maybe we should just turn CH into a dictatorship, with John Franklin as Imperator? Sure, a few beastings never hurt anybody. Maybe you could teach me some respect while we're at it.

Jo: Whoever said I'm enlisting support?

Mid A 15: This is most definitely true although the motives are unknown as of yet.

Euresto: Kimchi has already said that s/he would like to be kept seperate from that certain group. Oh but, of course, nobody actually listens to what I say, they just skim it and tell me to shut up and accept my lot.

[Eruresto]

Shall we keep the school in the echoes and shackles of the past, or shall we let it blossom and evolve with the fruits of the future?

This sounds like trying to enlist support to me.

[nastymum]

Sounds like cr@p to me

[Jo]

Kimchi, I hope you don't think I'm being patronising, because I'm not, but your last post I think was the most cogent so far and shows more than a glimmer that you have something meaningful to say. You are clearly articulate when you want to be - certainly your written English is a good deal better than many of your contemporaries (or indeed, many other age groups) - which suggests intelligence and attention to detail. Clearly you are also very angry.

I am sorry you and the rest of us on the forum seem to have got off on the wrong foot, but I think if you calmed down and explained your concerns in more detail you would find people willing to listen, probably to advise, and possibly to offer support. We have not dismissed you thus far simply because we are old-fashioned, pro-establishment, etc but rather because you have been somewhat abrasive and inflammatory. We are mostly broad-minded, did not have universally positive experiences at CH ourselves, and are particularly accepting of the views of all age groups - if I recall correctly we have everything from about 75 to about 16 (and that's just the active members, probably a wider range amongst lurkers).

I hope you're not going to tell me not to be so bl**dy pompous (censored only to avoid the Board's automatic swearword filter, not out of prudery!).....sit down, get yourself a coffee, and now that you have vented some of your anger, just talk to us!!!

[J.R.]

I'm not sure why I'm bothering to post this, maybe I'm just a young rebel who needs the imagination beaten out of him/herself.

J.R.: Nothing like a bit of military discipline, eh? Maybe we should just turn CH into a dictatorship, with John Franklin as Imperator? Sure, a few beastings never hurt anybody. Maybe you could teach me some respect while we're at it.

Jo: Whoever said I'm enlisting support?

Mid A 15: This is most definitely true although the motives are unknown as of yet.

Euresto: Kimchi has already said that s/he would like to be kept seperate from that certain group. Oh but, of course, nobody actually listens to what I say, they just skim it and tell me to shut up and accept my lot.

I'm sure I could ! IF you are, as I believe a pupil of CH, try and find some of your fellow posters on here. Most have met me and my family and would be pleased to inform you that I would be QUITE capable of giving the said lesson !

[Angela Woodford]

the abolition of bedrest.

Bedrest? Bedrest??

Is this a punishment? Or does "bedrest" actually mean something more gruesome?

(As in "gravel-crunching" which, for us, meant pointlessly walking up and down the Square for half an hour or so. )

Alan's right. There is always a running-in period for new management. Regard this as useful experience for when your company is taken over by a Board who gets it all wrong. Or for when you yourself are the new management, Kimchi.

Negotiate!

[kimchi]

I'm sure I could !
That sounds like a threat to me.
Most have met me and my family and would be pleased to inform you that I would be QUITE capable of giving the said lesson !
Nothing like a good beating to revitalise the spirit of the old days.

Just something I thought was interesting. Seems that people are allowed to threaten me, but I'm not allowed to tell them to mind their own business

NB: Why does everyone assume that I am a pupil? I will tell you honestly, right here, I am NOT a pupil.

[J.R.]

Not a threat. Just a statement of my thoughts.

Look up the dictionary term of THREAT

[nastymum]

I have done quite a lot of research or poked my nose into the school admssions policy. Much of it is anecdotal but the information below is from the internet. In summary , I think that certainly at Hertford before 1970 admission by need was not what it is today. Most puplis admtted were very able and came from backgrounds Jane Austen would describe as 'genteel poverty'. After that date there was an increasing drive to admit puils from seriously disadvantaged backgrounds. The council may have felt the school had drifted from its original purpose. The results of this are evident in the document below. The 'high risk' pupls way outnumber the 'low risk' and allegedly have been led to believe that their mere presence in the school is enough. Many of them seem to feel that the school is there to look after them in a more modern and flexible way. This involves tolerating behaviour that would not be tolerated in any other school because they have been so disadvantged. The Face Book Children of the Revolution certainly feel this and to point I can see that if that is what they have experienced while at the shool any changes to this 'ethos' will of course seem outrageous.
I certainly don't think parents of ' low risk' pupls are aware of this policy which is why they get cross if detrimental comments are made about the the behaviour of pupils in the school They are simply not aware of the make up of the school population and if they were might have chosen different school.
I agree whole heartedly with the school's admissions policy-it should take children who are mult-disadvantaged but on the understanding that the school rules are there to protect them and they are after all enjoying other people's money and should show some respect for that. They can't be allowed to dictate the rules .Below is the document which seems to explain a lot.
.
Extracts from CH Annual Review 2005/6

SERVING NEEDY CHILDREN
Christ’s Hospital’s charitable purpose, expressed in our Mission Statement, is the education of children in need.
Need is a subjective concept and has no finite definition. However, there are 5 key headings under which need has been assessed at Christ’s Hospital for many years which seem to have stood the test of time. They are:
• Housing/Environment - e.g. cramped conditions; living in a hostel.
• Education - local school not matching a child’s needs.
• Health - poor health of parent or sibling; a disabled parent.
• Social/Family Circumstances - traumatic family circumstances.
• Financial - low income, almost inevitably combined with other need factors.

Need scores of children accepting places at Christ’s Hospital
Need scores 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Low 49% 25% 26% 24% 17%
Medium to High 48% 70% 53% 67% 64%
Very High 3% 5% 21% 9% 19%

The 2006 entry exhibited higher levels of need than in the previous year. It is particularly encouraging to note that the percentage in the lower need bracket has continued to fall over the five year period. The overall need profile of the School continues to demonstrate Christ‘s Hospital’s commitment to its ethos.
(Later on the document goes on to say..)
And our Aims were
• To continue to achieve widespread awareness of Christ's Hospital, to ensure that we are able to attract pupils who will benefit from the opportunities available at the School.
• To continue to pursue new opportunities and partnerships to maximise awareness of Christ's Hospital within target areas
• To review and uphold a selection process which ensures the admittance of pupils who will benefit from a boarding education and who have the abilities and potential to
benefit from the educational opportunities available.
• To ensure that a minimum of 70% of Second Form (year 7) intake have medium to very high need.