says His Master's Voice, so it must be true. I know nothing about Moorlands School - it is in the Reading West constituency so obviously I have never been there - but whatever issues there are, it is clearly utterly wrong for them to be addressed by media briefing, which is what has been going on. It seems clear that following briefing to the media by some parents, the local education authority have now decided there is a serious problem (if there was why didn't they know about it before the stories hit HMV?) and the head teacher has been pushed out.
The head teacher is called Mrs Sudhana Singh.
Oh.
For shame.
6 comments:
For shame what?
I didn't realise how sad Abba's 'knowing me knowing you' was until I listened to it properly.
L9
Just take a second to think about this. Parents knew there was an issue back in December. The Head started at the schoo lin Septeember and 'hid' herself away in her office. The majority of parents and pupils wouldn't hve known who she was if we passed her in the school - she just hd herself away. The people in the know knew there was a problem back in December. When teachers started to leave, teachers started complaining to their Union about her, parents not able to have issues resolved because she didn't want to meet us as she was 'in a meeting' and then ofering meeting dates up to 3, 4, or 5 weeks later, misleading Governors about complaints, not resolving issues 5 months later...I can go on. Something had to be done.
Regarding the press, it appears the only time things get done nowadays is when the press get hold of a story and publicise it.
After all, a 'Vote of no Confidence' in the Head with 169 parent signatures in just less than two days says something!!! We can't all be wrong....
OK Emm - parents had concerns last December. With whom were those concerns raised? What was the result? What recognition polling of parents and pupils was done to confirm your assertion about Mrs Singh's profile, that those who would not recognise her if they saw her amounted to more than 50% of the parent and pupil population? Who are these "people in the know"? What did the union(s) do when teachers raised complaints with them? What were those complaints about? When were the concerns you mention, that parents did not have reasonable opportunities to meet the head, raised elsewhere, with the governors, the local authority or both? What was the outcome? When was this very serious complaint, that the head had lied to governors, raised? With whom? What issues were "not resolved five months later"? The Post does not tell us and neither do you, Emm. And now we are finally getting somewhere - "the only time things get done is when the press get hold of a story". So, have these "concerns" (we have never been told what they are) been addressed, finally, now that the Post has published something and Mrs Singh has been removed? To your satisfaction? As to the "vote of no confidence", yes you can all be wrong actually. I do not say you are, just that you can be. The Evening Post is accountable to nobody, local authorities and school governing bodies are. So - let's hear just what these concerns are. Go on, I dare you.
Well said to Jane for your insightful and intelligent interrogation of "Emm"'s poor arguments.
169 signatures..."we can't all be wrong!" is a dreadful argument. It's not at all difficult to see how Chinese whispers works...one rumour starts, gets spread to the next parent, and before you know it that the head's suddenly the worst human being in existence.
I worked as a primary school teaching assistant for 2 years and can speak from experience when I say that it's not uncommon for parents to gossip about staff and rumours to be spread. If I had ever wanted to, I wouldn't have had much difficulty in getting 169 signatures against a senior member of staff, either.
smells of 'witch hunt' to me...
Post a Comment