Brine Leas School, Nantwich

A headteacher in Nantwich has warned that feeder school pupils may not be guaranteed a place in future because of growing pressure on admission numbers.

Andrew Cliffe, who runs Brine Leas Academy, is having to raise their normal year 7 entry figure of 215 to 240 – resulting in two extra classes.

And he revealed they are bidding for funds to allow the school to make this rise a permanent figure.

But if this is not successful, he warned that some pupils from its eight feeder schools – Audlem, Bridgemere, Sound and District, Pear Tree, Stapeley Broad Lane, Weaver, Wrenbury, and Wyche – may miss out on a place in the future.

“Over the last three years demand for places has steadily increased from families putting BLS as their first choice – averages over 240 for the last three years,” he said.

“This in turn is reflected in the ever dwindling distance criteria where only a handful of children now receive a place on distance and the furthest distance itself is now less than two miles away.

“Going back 14 years, we used to take around 30% of the year group on distance. This has now dwindled to less than 5%.

“However, similar numbers still live outside catchment but choose to send their children to feeder schools.”

One of the reasons for this year’s pressure on numbers is sibling links.

An incredible 90 of the intake for September 2015 will have a brother or sister at the school.

andrew cliffe“Normally siblings, as a category, tops out at 60 – this is the largest cohort of siblings we’ve ever had,” added Mr Cliffe (pictured).

“Last year we also had 19 appeals for places.

“A handful were successful taking us up to 222 – the largest year group we have had.

“Demand for places is higher than ever and with a published admission number of 215 it would mean most partner schools would have children who would not be able to get into BLS.

“We have decided to go to 240, which means we can plan both staffing and the curriculum for 10 teaching groups rather than eight.

“But if we do not get additional funding, then the 240 could be a one-off and children in partner primary schools will have an idea that their place is not automatic as it has been since 2000.”

The school will not hear until November if their funding bid for a permanent year 7 increase has been successful.

11 Comments

  1. totally agree, do we really need any more houses?

    We moved to Wybunbury 4 years ago and one reason for that was that we’d be in the brine lees catchment so our 2 daughters would get in there, since all the new houses have been built in Stapeley they have reduced the catchment and now we’re no longer in it…

  2. George Thomas says:

    Well I have lived here for over twenty years, and it gets worse each year, there needs to be a better solution. However if I need to be off the Cronkinson Estate on time, I drive off the estate earlier, park up then spend some ten minutes walking home, returning to my car an hour later and selecting a different route that can actually beat the queues. This obviously isn’t the answer long term, and would not suit a lot of drivers, but it sure helps the stress levels, and the exercise is quite useful too.

  3. Paul Duncalf (if that’s his real name) obviously doesn’t live locally or understand local issues, otherwise he wouldn’t have written the comments he did in the post above.

    Mr Duncalf- I think you will find that Mr Cliffe IS sticking to ‘running his school’ as you put it. HE is the Headteacher- NOT you! He is voicing his legitimate concerns, as is entirely appropriate for somebody in his position.

    You say he is ‘playing at politics’. No he’s not. He’s stating facts.

    I suggest you take a long hard look at the facts in future before making such comments… … you’re beginning to sound like a disgruntled local developer…

    And what exactly would the, in your words, ‘rabble rousing’ involve? Are you suggesting there could be an ulterior motive? Shurely not?!

    • Yes, I do live locally and am not a ‘disgruntled developer’ as I said, ‘if’ Mr Cliffe has a legitimate point then he should be consulting with his funding provider/LEA, through legitimate channels not trying to bring undue pressure through the local press!

      • The fact that Paul lives locally makes his argument all the more incomprehensible.

        Is he oblivious to the traffic chaos that ensues in the early mornings when thousands of cars attempt to leave the Cronkinson’s Farm development at the same time the morning school run is at its peak, with parents delivering children to 5 schools within a half-mile radius of Brine Leas (some of whom not doubt drive in from places such as Wrenbury and Audlem):

        1 Brine Leas Secondary School and 6th Form

        2 Stapeley Broad Lane Primary School (where road rage is a daily occurrence)

        3 Weaver Primary School

        4 Pear Tree Primary School

        5 St Anne’s Catholic Primary School

        So, Paul, it is obvious that there is, as the article puts it, ‘growing pressure on admission numbers’ at Brine Leas. Can’t you see this? Or perhaps you don’t want to see it? Or maybe you have a problem with Mr Cliffe himself, as your posts do appear to be specifically in relation to Mr Cliffe as opposed to the school?

        You maintain that Mr Cliffe should be ‘consulting with his funding provider/LEA… not trying to bring undue pressure through the local press!’.

        But Paul, have you forgotten that we live in a democracy? And that there is a phenomenon generally referred to as ‘the press’.

        You must know about both, as you have chosen to share your views with the public via Nantwich News which, incidentally, does ‘what it says on the tin’ and not surprisingly actually provides NEWS about NANTWICH!

        Likening Nantwich News to the Daily Mail really is banal.

        In addition to sharing your views with the readers of Nantwich News, why not email your tips/suggestions to Mr Cliffe directly? I just pulled the school’s general email address off the internet:

        [email protected]

        I am sure Mr Cliffe would be delighted to hear from you…

        • Intersting points, but none seem to relate to the article in Nantwich News, you’ve now moved from a.) the assumption that the article was a direct comment on new housing development, which is not stated anywhere in the article to b.) that an increase in the school population is a result of ‘traffic chaos’. Unfortunately success breeds it’s own problems, and perceived to be successful schools will draw in children from outside of the catchment area. For example I know of one couple who do not even live in Cheshire East, who rent a flat on Cronkinson Oak and have it down as their main residence, hence qualify to send their children to Pear Tree and Brine Leas. There is nothing illegal in what they are doing, but they have to drive from outside the borough to deliver their children to school. Unfortunately if people want to send their children to the best schools they have to understand that they are not the only parents who want to do so, and in an ever increasingly competitive society, people will resort to any means to ensure that their children get every advantage. This results in over subscribed schools. To suggest that putting a moritoreum on all house building in the Brine Leas catchment area would stop the increase in applications to Brine Leas is in your words ‘banal,.

          And no I do not have a problem with Mr Cliffe, as you put it. I do have a problem with, as stated previously somebody who is supposed to be spending his day organinsing a busy school, rabble rousing in the press, something he has obviously managed to succeed with you.

          Unfortunately when you take up a position of responsibility in society, policeman, doctor, headmaster, etc. there comes with it a need to act with a responsibilty to understand that statements made in the press can be mistrued, as you have.

          • Oh dear, Paul.

            You infer that I made ‘the assumption that the article was a direct comment on new housing development which is not stated anywhere in the article.’

            Wrong., I did not assume that the article was a direct comment on new housing development. If you are still of this opinion, then I suggest you re-read my comments.

            You say I have ‘moved on from…b.) that an increase in the school population is a result of ‘traffic chaos.’

            Wrong again. Your current score is a woeful 0 (or, in football speak, ‘nil’) from 2.

            You refer to a couple ‘who rent a flat on Cronkinson Oak and have it down as their main residence, hence qualify to send their children to Pear Tree and Brine Leas.’

            You then claim ‘There is nothing illegal in what they are doing, but they have to drive from outside the borough to deliver their children to school.’

            I am sure they don’t, as you put it, ‘have to drive’ to ‘deliver their children to school’. What? They ‘have’ to drive? This implies they don’t have a choice in the matter but there will be many choices available to them, from car sharing to a school bus, to public transport i.e. buses and trains.

            You say that ‘Unfortunately if people want to send their children to the best schools they have to understand that they are not the only parents who want to do so, and in an ever increasingly competitive society, people will resort to any means to ensure that their children get every advantage. This results in over subscribed schools.’

            EXACTLY, got it in one! It can be inferred from the Nantwich News article that Brine Leas School is very likely to be over-subscribed in the near future.

            So your statement that ‘This results in over subscribed schools’ means that you have just deconstructed your own argument, in which you seemingly have a ‘beef’ with Mr Cliffe simply because he is expressing legitimate concerns about the school where he is the headteacher.

            What exactly does your comment ‘We don’t need the Nantwich News turning into the Daily Mail’ actually mean?

            You say you live locally. If you bother reading the local newspaper, you will see that page 3 of today’s Chronicle features a similar article to the Nantwich News article to which this string of comments relates.

            In case you aren’t already aware, newspapers are sometimes referred to as ‘the Press.’ We live in a democracy and one of the roles of the press is to report on topics that are in the public interest: Mr Cliffe’s legitimate concerns being but one example.

            I hate to break it to you, but in case you haven’t noticed you are in a minority of one on this thread. But, of course, you are entitled to your opinions, as we live in a democracy.

            Returning to page 3 of today’s Chronicle and your views on the Daily Mail (or ‘rag’, if you like), perhaps you would like to enlighten us as to your preferred newspaper?

            Unless, of course, it is one of those ‘highbrow’ newspapers that feature, how shall I say, ‘alternative’ subject matter on Page 3 which is more visual in nature…?

            • That’s funny, i too find myself in full agreement with all the other comments made by other writers. As stated previously, it is you who have assumed that an objection to a public statement is in some way an endorsement of more housing developments.

              As for your last paragraph I must say such puerile comments do nothing to strengthen any of your arguments.

              Try sticking to facts, not making assumptions and wandering from the point just to make cheap jibes. Name calling is not very clever, and because of such I shall make no more comment, and leave you to make further immature remarks at your free will. Ta ta

  4. Perhaps Mr Cliffe should stick to running his school and consulting with his L.E.A., rather than playing at politics and trying to worry parents of children in these outlying schools. We don’t need the Nantwich News turning into the Daily Mail, or one of our local Headteachers using it for rabble rousing.

  5. tanisha cliffe says:

    Yes it is these developers that are building houses on green field land. One of them being “very rich” David Gladman from Gladman Developments who lives in a big house in Congleton surrounded by GREEN FIELDS!!!!! He is after planning permission to build 85 HOUSES in the small village of Wrenbury. No way will our school in the villages cope with that intake of children that many houses would generate. The Government need to stop all these developers finding “loopholes” to get planning permission to build houses in our beautiful countryside.

  6. Protect Stapeley says:

    When the developers of the large scale housing developments in and around Nantwich submit their planning applications they always report that there are pupil places in Nantwich school. Heaven forbid that they are telling porkies!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

By using this form you agree with the storage and handling of your data by this website, to learn more please read our privacy policy.

*

Captcha * Time limit is exhausted. Please reload CAPTCHA.