Cold war over coat policy (From The Oxford Times)

CURRYMAD, HEADINGTON says...
7:35am Sat 7 Feb 09

He should have the right coat on. Rules are rules. I blame the parents.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

justbored, Wantage says...
7:52am Sat 7 Feb 09

I went to king alfreds and I can see things havent changed. Anything that makes you stand out as an individual they take away from you and then charge you for conforming!

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Ole' Grouch, Oxon says...
9:29am Sat 7 Feb 09

If they don't like the rules take the kid to another school. I agree rules are rules. Why do people make a song and dance when they are obviously in the wrong and why does the Oxford Mail publish sensationalised rubbish why not concentrate reports of News Stories.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

philg, Oxford says...
9:39am Sat 7 Feb 09

Rules are rules, but that shouldn't stop the school having a bit of compassion and letting the kid have his coat back to walk home. If he'd had the wrong jumper too, would they have sent him home in just a shirt?

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

DanOxford, Oxford says...
10:24am Sat 7 Feb 09

Britain's Blame Culture once again.

Even if the children are too gormless to put the correct coat on in the morning, you would have thought the parents would check.

The same parents who presumably whinge about it all going to Hell in a Hand Cart because society is blighted by selfish, self- righteous people who put their own 'individuality' above all others and fail to take even the most basic steps to ensure their own safety or comfort, thus requiring the Nanny State to run every aspect of all of our lives.

As for turning up on building sites blah blah blah (Making Sense, above)you'll notice outside every building site large notices saying 'No Hard Hat, No Boots= No Work'

Children who cannot conform to a few basic common ground rules are ill- prepared for real life and are then anti- social or cost us money to keep them on benefits while they consider everything beneath them.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Rankin7, Oxford says...
10:52am Sat 7 Feb 09

This school should be sued for negligence and it's head teacher prosecuted for child cruelty.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

sparro, torbay says...
11:08am Sat 7 Feb 09

Do the teacher`s wear uniform at this school? They bring back thought`s of Little Hitler`s

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

JK, Oxford says...
2:01pm Sat 7 Feb 09

The school has a uniform policy. By sending your child to that school you are agreeing to abide by that policy. If there is genuine hardship, there are ways and means of making sure a child has the correct gear. OK, to let a child walk home without a coat was harsh to say the least but how many times had this child, and his parents, been warned about the coat or lack of the correct uniform. They had already had some warnings and had chosen to ignore them. Don't flout the rules and then whine when you get your just reward!

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

jscoop, Wantage says...
2:20pm Sat 7 Feb 09

I am one of Sean's parents, and to answer these people who support the school, and to elaborate on the reasons for our actions, that were not covered in this article I add these comments. My wife and I have 4 children, my 3 older girls went to King Alfred's over a 11 year period and not one of them ever had school branded coats, why? because they did not exist. When introduced a few years ago they were only originally compulsory for year 7 students, it has only been recently that they became compulsory for years 8-10. However, Year 11 students do NOT have to have branded school coats. Where is the fairness and logic in that; is Mr Spiers implying in his statement that Year 11 students welfare is not important if the rule does not apply to them? We questioned early on, once the full implication of their new uniform policy became known to us; why should hard pressed parents pay extra for a coat that the child would not normally wear when we had already paid for a coat he would, and that prior to a few years ago was totally acceptable to wear to school? We have had discussions with the school about these coats on a number of occasions where we have put forward our objections, and not once have the school came back to us with a legitimate reason for their introduction. This policy was introduced with absolutely no consultation with the parents, which is against government advice. This coat is now the single most expensive piece of school uniform, and the single piece that is worn and used the least by the students; if my son wears his coat 6 or so times a year to school I would be surprised, and that goes for a majority of students. A substantial number of students do not have these coats, or if they do they certainly do not wear them from what I have seen. Many students wear non school branded coats. The school provides the students with no hooks for these coats, and the few lockers that are there are mostly broken or unusable, and the students even have to pay to use them, they cannot wear the coats in class and have to carry them around with them all day. Also if this coat is so important to the students why did the school send a number of coats left in lost and found to a local charity shop with no effort being made to get them back to their rightful owners? Kudos on supporting the local charity certainly, but also opening up another opportunity to sell the parents another coat maybe? They say it's three years since these were introduced, so why have haven't the whole school got these coats by now if it's such a widely publicized rule? Someone mentioned in this column that they blame the parents (strange, why is it never the schools's failing, always the parents?), and they may have a point, it is the responsibility of the parents to purchase the uniform for the child, Sean has everything else in relation to uniform, indeed we support that uniform policy, but my son does not have the money to purchase a school coat, so why then does the school punish the child for "the sins of the father"? Do these people support that sort of action? Simple question, who do they know who would take a piece of protective clothing away from a child (and Sean was not the only child deprived of a coat that day) and allow that child walk home in extremely cold conditions? Forget about rules and regulations, simple question, is that right? We have absolutely no objection to a school coat being made available for students families to purchase if they wish, that is perfectly fair and acceptable to all, but we do object to the school using our son's welfare to blackmail and force us to purchase a coat. Surely that is a fair standpoint for parents to take? Why should a school impose such rules withoput considering the affect on the parents? Black shoes are compulsory wear, and always have been, we support that fully. If children had worn trainers instead of black shoes would they have sent them home in their stockinged feet?
The school has been aware of our concerns regarding the coat policy and have never got back to us. The school contacted us that morning saying he had the wrong coat and we reiterated our concerns and they PROMISED to get back to us with their response (if it was their unswerving rules why did they say that, why not, 'No, you know the rules, unless you come and collect his coat he's going home without it') and yet they made a decision to send Sean home without his coat without informing us, as they promised to do. What is so wrong in parents standing up against something that they believe to be unfair? Our son did have a coat for his walk to school (he's wearing it in the picture), a perfectly good coat that he can and will where at anytime and anywhere. In response to those points about us knowing about the the school policy, at the open evening 3 years ago no mention at all was made that a school coat had been introduced and that it was a compulsory item. (Remember this was the 4th open evening I had attended over the years, no coat was ever in existence) I saw the coat at the end of the evening when we collected our sons uniform, there was no sign saying these coats were compulsory school wear, or no teacher present making sure everyone was aware regarding the new policy about these coats. The government set out guidelines and advice regarding school uniforms about parent school consultation about the uniform, none happened in this case, and one that recommended that the parents should have a choice where to purchase uniforms. You can only buy KA coats from the school, there is no choice. What about those rules and guidlenes? OK for the school to ignore those is it?
In response to 'DanOxford'this is not whingeing, this is asking a legitimate question about a school policy that has not been answered, and he makes the same mistake in assuming the judgement is down to the 'children who cannot conform to a few basic ground rules....' It is not the child's resonsibility at all in this issue, and if anything is likely to develop anti-social attitudes it is ill-thought out and unfair rules that result in inhuman treatments, not parents who have, in his opinion, the temerity to question actions in our education system. And how arrogant and ignorant of him to think that anyone who questions such rules are on benefits or are trying to scam the system, I have paid hundreds if not thousands of pounds to this school for my childrens education over the years. This is not about money, this is about right and wrong, can't he see that? And his ridiculous and uninformed statement about building sites, he's right, it does state 'no boots no hard hats,no work' but it doesn't say 'No McAlpine Boots, Or no Taylor Woodrow boots or hard hat no work' does it? As long as the appropiate protective wear is present it makes no diference what 'brand' the equipment is. Who looks gormless now 'DanOxford'? What message is the school sending to the children when they consider that it is within their rights to deprive an individual not only of their property but the means to provide protection from the elements unless money passes hand for another type of branded item? Where would the world be if everyone just followed rules blindly without questioning the reasons for them. With that in mind how can Mr Spiers say they are concerned about the childrens welfare (except Year 11 students of course), how does that work? How more can the childrens welfare be compromised than by sending them out into freezing conditions without their coat, regardless of a school rule, or indeed if the whole world and his wife were aware of the policy, that is wrong. As indeed is any rule, or society that allows such treatment to occur; no sorry Mr Spiers cannot hide behind his statement.The school coat has no impact whatsoever on King Alfreds ability to teach the children. The school coat should not have been made a compulsory purchase for parents without consultation, there is no reason for it, and the school should not have sent children home in freezing conditions without their coats. From a simple moral standpoint, how can they really justify their action?

I am one of Sean's parents, and to answer these people who support the school, and to elaborate on the reasons for our actions, that were not covered in this article I add these comments. My wife and I have 4 children, my 3 older girls went to King Alfred's over a 11 year period and not one of them ever had school branded coats, why? because they did not exist. When introduced a few years ago they were only originally compulsory for year 7 students, it has only been recently that they became compulsory for years 8-10. However, Year 11 students do NOT have to have branded school coats. Where is the fairness and logic in that; is Mr Spiers implying in his statement that Year 11 students welfare is not important if the rule does not apply to them? We questioned early on, once the full implication of their new uniform policy became known to us; why should hard pressed parents pay extra for a coat that the child would not normally wear when we had already paid for a coat he would, and that prior to a few years ago was totally acceptable to wear to school? We have had discussions with the school about these coats on a number of occasions where we have put forward our objections, and not once have the school came back to us with a legitimate reason for their introduction. This policy was introduced with absolutely no consultation with the parents, which is against government advice. This coat is now the single most expensive piece of school uniform, and the single piece that is worn and used the least by the students; if my son wears his coat 6 or so times a year to school I would be surprised, and that goes for a majority of students. A substantial number of students do not have these coats, or if they do they certainly do not wear them from what I have seen. Many students wear non school branded coats. The school provides the students with no hooks for these coats, and the few lockers that are there are mostly broken or unusable, and the students even have to pay to use them, they cannot wear the coats in class and have to carry them around with them all day. Also if this coat is so important to the students why did the school send a number of coats left in lost and found to a local charity shop with no effort being made to get them back to their rightful owners? Kudos on supporting the local charity certainly, but also opening up another opportunity to sell the parents another coat maybe? They say it's three years since these were introduced, so why have haven't the whole school got these coats by now if it's such a widely publicized rule? Someone mentioned in this column that they blame the parents (strange, why is it never the schools's failing, always the parents?), and they may have a point, it is the responsibility of the parents to purchase the uniform for the child, Sean has everything else in relation to uniform, indeed we support that uniform policy, but my son does not have the money to purchase a school coat, so why then does the school punish the child for "the sins of the father"? Do these people support that sort of action? Simple question, who do they know who would take a piece of protective clothing away from a child (and Sean was not the only child deprived of a coat that day) and allow that child walk home in extremely cold conditions? Forget about rules and regulations, simple question, is that right? We have absolutely no objection to a school coat being made available for students families to purchase if they wish, that is perfectly fair and acceptable to all, but we do object to the school using our son's welfare to blackmail and force us to purchase a coat. Surely that is a fair standpoint for parents to take? Why should a school impose such rules withoput considering the affect on the parents? Black shoes are compulsory wear, and always have been, we support that fully. If children had worn trainers instead of black shoes would they have sent them home in their stockinged feet? The school has been aware of our concerns regarding the coat policy and have never got back to us. The school contacted us that morning saying he had the wrong coat and we reiterated our concerns and they PROMISED to get back to us with their response (if it was their unswerving rules why did they say that, why not, 'No, you know the rules, unless you come and collect his coat he's going home without it') and yet they made a decision to send Sean home without his coat without informing us, as they promised to do. What is so wrong in parents standing up against something that they believe to be unfair? Our son did have a coat for his walk to school (he's wearing it in the picture), a perfectly good coat that he can and will where at anytime and anywhere. In response to those points about us knowing about the the school policy, at the open evening 3 years ago no mention at all was made that a school coat had been introduced and that it was a compulsory item. (Remember this was the 4th open evening I had attended over the years, no coat was ever in existence) I saw the coat at the end of the evening when we collected our sons uniform, there was no sign saying these coats were compulsory school wear, or no teacher present making sure everyone was aware regarding the new policy about these coats. The government set out guidelines and advice regarding school uniforms about parent school consultation about the uniform, none happened in this case, and one that recommended that the parents should have a choice where to purchase uniforms. You can only buy KA coats from the school, there is no choice. What about those rules and guidlenes? OK for the school to ignore those is it? In response to 'DanOxford'this is not whingeing, this is asking a legitimate question about a school policy that has not been answered, and he makes the same mistake in assuming the judgement is down to the 'children who cannot conform to a few basic ground rules....' It is not the child's resonsibility at all in this issue, and if anything is likely to develop anti-social attitudes it is ill-thought out and unfair rules that result in inhuman treatments, not parents who have, in his opinion, the temerity to question actions in our education system. And how arrogant and ignorant of him to think that anyone who questions such rules are on benefits or are trying to scam the system, I have paid hundreds if not thousands of pounds to this school for my childrens education over the years. This is not about money, this is about right and wrong, can't he see that? And his ridiculous and uninformed statement about building sites, he's right, it does state 'no boots no hard hats,no work' but it doesn't say 'No McAlpine Boots, Or no Taylor Woodrow boots or hard hat no work' does it? As long as the appropiate protective wear is present it makes no diference what 'brand' the equipment is. Who looks gormless now 'DanOxford'? What message is the school sending to the children when they consider that it is within their rights to deprive an individual not only of their property but the means to provide protection from the elements unless money passes hand for another type of branded item? Where would the world be if everyone just followed rules blindly without questioning the reasons for them. With that in mind how can Mr Spiers say they are concerned about the childrens welfare (except Year 11 students of course), how does that work? How more can the childrens welfare be compromised than by sending them out into freezing conditions without their coat, regardless of a school rule, or indeed if the whole world and his wife were aware of the policy, that is wrong. As indeed is any rule, or society that allows such treatment to occur; no sorry Mr Spiers cannot hide behind his statement.The school coat has no impact whatsoever on King Alfreds ability to teach the children. The school coat should not have been made a compulsory purchase for parents without consultation, there is no reason for it, and the school should not have sent children home in freezing conditions without their coats. From a simple moral standpoint, how can they really justify their action?

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

The Voice of Truth, Oxford says...
4:34pm Sat 7 Feb 09

If children had worn trainers instead of black shoes would they have sent them home in their stockinged feet?

I know a teacher at Oxford School who would have done - dont we Mrs Watkins..

Can I just ask did your son actually go to the teacher at the end of the day and ask for his coat back ? If he did the school are wrong - if he didnt then he has to take some responsibility for getting cold.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

jockox3, Headington Hill, Oxford says...
4:48pm Sat 7 Feb 09

"State run monopoly enforces petty self-imposed rules in worst weather of the decade"

I agree with Mr/Mrs Cooper above. This is bonkers. I am, largely, in favour of some kind of dress code (I won't call it a uniform because I believe the tribalism involved in a "uniform" is just petty), but in extraordinary circumstances to enforce it such that a child could be caused damage is ignorant, probably negligent and should not be let go lightly. They certainly need challenging, especially fiven their position as a local state enforced monopoly effectively.

Presumably they have a code on footwear too. Were any wellies confiscated?

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

JK, Oxford says...
5:05pm Sat 7 Feb 09

If the lack of school coat does not impinge on the ability to teach a child at this or any other school then the same argument can be made for the school sweatshirt, polo shirt, black footwear etc. This is policy - and, as you would expect, it has been rolled in from the lower years and you would not expect it to be compulsory for Y11 this year. It's school policy - live with it!

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

vinnie123, Wantage says...
5:21pm Sat 7 Feb 09

My name is vinnie and i am a close friend of seans & in seans classes and i was there when this incident happend my coat also got conviscated of me exactly the same time seans did when we both got told to remove our coats as it was not school uniform.Sean refused which i was planning on doing as the weather was dreadful.But i eventually handed it to the year 10 student manager and i had to walk to the other side of wantage to get home.I think sean done the right thing as coats of any sort should be aloud.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

DanOxford, Oxford says...
6:55pm Sat 7 Feb 09

sparro wrote:
Do the teacher`s wear uniform at this school? They bring back thought`s of Little Hitler`s

1) Yes- teachers have a professional dress code, decided upon by the head and governors, just as pupil school uniform is.

2) 'Little Hitlers...' go and Google 'Godwin's Law'

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Whitto, Oxford says...
7:19pm Sat 7 Feb 09

vinnie123 wrote:
My name is vinnie and i am a close friend of seans & in seans classes and i was there when this incident happend my coat also got conviscated of me exactly the same time seans did when we both got told to remove our coats as it was not school uniform.Sean refused which i was planning on doing as the weather was dreadful.But i eventually handed it to the year 10 student manager and i had to walk to the other side of wantage to get home.I think sean done the right thing as coats of any sort should be aloud.

Going on this example from a pupil, I would urge all parents to get their children out of this school now.

Any teachers reading this story must be so proud of how their efforts to educate are working, especially the English department.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

EB, Oxford says...
7:56pm Sat 7 Feb 09

Typical school, putting their image before the student's wellbeing.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Rankin7, Oxford says...
8:33pm Sat 7 Feb 09

OK, hands up all those who couldn't be bothered to read jscoop's concise comment.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Andrew:Oxford, Oxford says...
9:46pm Sat 7 Feb 09

I can see a business opportunity here... Anywhere to set up a cloakroom facility near the school?

Difficult to judge without seeing the school coat, but as long as it was a fleece lined gore-tex waterproof, I can't see how it could be unsuitable for the winter weather.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Leopardy, Abingdon says...
6:31am Sun 8 Feb 09

I'm all for school uniform but having to purchase two coats for each of your children (one for school and one for non school use) is an expense most parents can ill-afford. Can't see many children wanting to wear their school coat out at weekends! We had the same thing when our school decided to change its rule on school shoes half way through the school year. Needless to say our 3 children continued to be "bullied" by some teachers until they had outgrown their sensible black shoes and I could afford to replace them with some very similar ones.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

sparro, torbay says...
8:03am Sun 8 Feb 09

DanOxford, Oxford says...
6:55pm Sat 7 Feb 09
sparro wrote:
Do the teacher`s wear uniform at this school? They bring back thought`s of Little Hitler`s
1) Yes- teachers have a professional dress code, decided upon by the head and governors, just as pupil school uniform is.

2) 'Little Hitlers...' go and Google 'Godwin's Law'

Dan, Everyone is entitled to their opinion/comment. Please dont offer advice & if you dont like my comment, you know what you can do.
It might help if you use your own advice & Google - dress code & uniform, they are totally different.
Try sticking to the subject

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

CURRYMAD, HEADINGTON says...
8:12am Sun 8 Feb 09

What a laugh, this is better than reading the paper.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

parent_KAs, Wantage says...
4:13pm Sun 8 Feb 09

As a parent of 2 children who have left in recent years and 1 still st the school, we have also been disappointed in the lack of common sense shown by the school when making decisions such as this.
2 examples out of many I could give – a friends child who’s shoes were un-wearable, phoned the school to say he would be wearing trainers, & they would be renewed at the weekend - the child ended up working in solitary all day.
Another friend - snow fell unexpectedly one day a couple of years ago – child tried to ring her grandfather to pick her up as she had 2 miles to walk home and only a flimsy jacket (before the coat policy) had her phone confiscated AFTER school hours because she was trying to ring him from inside the school premises & phones were banned from use within school. Ended up walking home & getting absolutely soaking wet as they wouldn’t give her the phone back to use it outside of school.
In our experience, we have seen many difficult students get away with so much whereas other softer targets seem to always be made an example of.
I’m in favour of rules and uniform, but common sense has to also be a factor.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

jack smart, burcot says...
6:57pm Sun 8 Feb 09

THE PROTEST MARCH GROUP WILL MEET AT 12.00 OUTSIDE THE SCHOOL

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

ex so'ton, Abingdon says...
7:42pm Sun 8 Feb 09

jack smart wrote:
THE PROTEST MARCH GROUP WILL MEET AT 12.00 OUTSIDE THE SCHOOL

Only if it doesn't snow, otherwise the school will close!

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

ex so'ton, Abingdon says...
7:43pm Sun 8 Feb 09

jack smart wrote:
THE PROTEST MARCH GROUP WILL MEET AT 12.00 OUTSIDE THE SCHOOL

Only if it doesn't snow, otherwise the school will close!

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Williamhordle, wantage says...
7:54pm Sun 8 Feb 09

Taking a coat off a child when it is cold is an outrage. but it clearly says in the uniform rules that hooded jumpers are not allowed. It has been this way for many years so dont send your child in an outfit that is against the schools uniform policy. It is setting a bad example to the children for the adults to break the rules.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Williamhordle, wantage says...
7:57pm Sun 8 Feb 09

I would also like to say that some of the language of the oarents in this thread is an outrage nad you are clearly not setting a very good example to your children who will ultimatly read your comments.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Williamhordle, wantage says...
1:31am Mon 9 Feb 09

Although I also agree that the coat rule is silly and not necessary, I do think that by calling the head names in a newspaper comments page is going to do anything about it. Start a petition. If the school has most parents on a petition they will have to change. Do you really thing that by called Mr Spiers' names here is really going to do anything apart from teaching your children the wrong morals and values towards figures of authority. By starting a petition and getting the children involded would give them a much better moral standing. Seroiusly you all sound like kids in the play ground. Grow up and start srtting the example that the kids in wantage quite obvious need and are not getting !!!!

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

auntyflo, wantage says...
10:48am Mon 9 Feb 09

I went to this school a few years ago and my god it is still ran by a pathetic little miser who thinks he is the be all and end all of the school. At the end of the school day when i child is to walk home or what ever and is off school grounds they do not have to wear the school uniform so why did they not give the coat back? they do not need to wear the uniform after 3:10! coming from a family with not alot of money how the hell can the school tell parents to go out and buy a coat for a child that no doubt already has one. if the school wants pupils to wear the **** coats go out and buy it for them instead of making the parents who cant afford to buy it.

Simon Spires was a Tw@ 4 years ago and still hasnt changed! he is a crap teacher and an even worse "head techer" as he seems to think he is.
Get the little hobbit fired

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Garage Man, Wantage says...
4:05pm Mon 9 Feb 09

There are a number of issues that seem to be mixed up here.

If the coat is school uniform than that is within the prerogative of the school 'management' to enforce. If this is truly a 'first offence' then removal of the coat for the day and returning it for the homeward journey together with a letter for the parents (or even a phone call during the day) would seem appropriate. Then the position is clear for all to see. Maybe the enforcement in this case was heavy handed (I have seen this happen to one of my children) but this needs to be dealt with as a separate issue to the non-compliance with uniform.

I understand the parents concern about cost (as I also have 2 kids at the school) but in a lot of employment some sort of 'uniform' is required that has to be bought at your own expense - that's just life in a corporate world! If you don't comply in some jobs first you get a verbal warning, then written, then you're out!

Apart from trying to embarrass the school and possibly the student I really don't see what this article will achieve unfortunately!

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

wantage lad, Didcot says...
7:18pm Mon 9 Feb 09

On the basis of rules are rules can we rewind a week or so to the school in question trying not to work within the rules of the planning application it submitted and agreed regarding the horrendour green hanger at west site.....?

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Area, Abingdon says...
7:36pm Mon 9 Feb 09

What would have happened if the child had further to walk and had an accident on the way home.??
who would have been blamed then
The parents NO at least they suppied there child with a warm coat to wear maybe they didnt have the money for the SCHOOL COAT not all of us can afford these items at the moment so as I said who would be to blame then!!

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Lozzie, says...
9:47pm Mon 9 Feb 09

The school are very good at enforcing rules on easier targets whilst turning a blind eye to the more serious offences as they are harder to tackle. But if Mr Spiers has any authority at all - he should have stern words with his English department who seem to have failed some pupils past and present....

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

juze, wantage says...
10:56pm Mon 9 Feb 09

Now I know why I see so many children walking home without coats every day!

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

dad, grove says...
11:42pm Mon 9 Feb 09

I think this is an outrage,the country is in a financial nightmare and parents are all wondering where the next pennie comes from and the children are made to suffer.I have two children at this school and with my job on the balance carn't afford to buy coats every term.they had them at the start of the term but could not carry them around school and had no where to hang them.They have now grown out of them so what does this mean I take the gamble by sending my kids to school knowing thay might have to cycle 2 miles home in this weather without their coats or do I just keep them off until I can afford the new school coats.Do I PICK betwwen there HEALTH or there EDUCATION as i guess at this school you carn't have both if you havn't got the money.If the school is so set on school uniforms then I would it should apply to the whole school or again what message is being sent.If you have the money or your old enough it's ok

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

BorderLass, Ex Oxon says...
9:55am Tue 10 Feb 09

I left this school 21 years ago when it was Segsbury it was rubbish then and it is interesting to see things have not changed.

I had to cycle in from Grove each day as my parents struggled to afford the bus fare never mind buying a compulsory coat!! They used to buy me one that could be seen from a distance so I would be safe on my bike.

I left this school with barely any qualifications feeling stupid and now have two degrees which I have studied for as well as working and am doing fine thank you but not down to my school.

There is hope the other side of school for the poor unfortunates who have no choice but to attend this school.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

STOCKHAM LADY, WANTAGE says...
6:14pm Tue 10 Feb 09

I believe the problems and petty rules at King Alfreds gets worse.My three children have had a lucky escape by leaving i think.My support goes with the Cooper Family not King Alfreds and it is about time they were more education focused than trivial matters not relating to the childs education at all.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Horsemadangel123, Wantage says...
8:18pm Tue 10 Feb 09

I vaguely knew Sean, and I think this coat-business is an outrage. I'm definately with Seans side on this one. The rules at KAs get worse and worse, and these petty rules should be gone. This has gone much too far, and the school should be changed. Sorry KAs, but you are in deep trouble.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

lil_man_hater, wantage says...
9:40pm Tue 10 Feb 09

I've never got on with spiers, in the four years that ive been at KA's. He is a bully towards any child that likes to express thier own opinion, and he confronts them by aggresive body language. If a pupil trys to defend them selves when confronted with this mans bad attitude they are thrown into severe punishments, with no actually need. The only actually crime is some harm to his large ego.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Richard of Wantage, says...
12:39pm Wed 11 Feb 09

As a parent of a child who attends KA's I'm having more and more concerns about our school. The school is more concerned about its dress code than its educational standards. With less than 50% of our children passing basic GCSE English and maths last year, what’s going on?
Our children are not stupid and knowing a lot them, in my daughters year, they are very bright and hard working. Yet I feel this school is failing them. As parents and tax payers we should discussing the education provided by the school rather than the stupid decision of allowing a child to go home with no coat.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Hwatts, Wantage says...
8:09pm Wed 11 Feb 09

I attend this school, infact,I am one of Seans friends, but I would like to have my chip in this, I had my none school coat taken away from me the same day, and I believe this is a outrage! the school coat costs 25£ to buy, what if some people dont have that kind of money?I also know that the school coat looks absoloutly vile, and I would be ashamed if i was to wear that. I do agree with the school for making uniform , it shows you look good, but i dont like the school coat, so what am i going to do? walk over a mile in sub-zero temperature? I think its time the school gave a to our way, their way to tight and pretty much, they love to see us annoyed! I hope my school re-thinks this rule, because im not wasting £25 of cash on a coat that looks like a donkey's rear-end. I would much rather be spending it on something I would use!

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

shortenn, Woolstone says...
8:29pm Wed 11 Feb 09

hi im Nicole & im in Seans year and im a good friend of his and i beleieve its ridiculously unfair to not let Sean or any of us wear other coats. I mean it isnt like his coat is bright blue. Its plain and simple and i keeps him warm. I've had my coat conviscated and it was plain black too, personally i think its stupid and if we all get pneumonia its the school's fault. The school coats are hideous for a start and secondly they cost £25 and im not going to waste my money buying another coast when iv got plently of other decent coats at home. Maybe if the coats looked better and were cheaper we mgiht by them but im pretty sure i wont be wearing one of our schools coats any time soon.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Hwatts, Wantage says...
8:36pm Wed 11 Feb 09

We need to set a date, where we gather AS many people as possible to wear a none king alfred coat,I personally believe they have a aweful set of teachers , and there more interested on this than our learning.
my form tutor today said
"Us teachers get very low paid, but we do it because we enjoy teaching you"
this is utter rubbish, they enjoy us having fun, if you took a walk around king alfreds, you would see exactly what I mean

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

shortenn, Woolstone says...
8:41pm Wed 11 Feb 09

^ EXACTLY. personally i beleieve that mr spiers and other teachers are more worried about what the school looks like and how it reflects on them, than our welfare. If they just let us all wear a simple and plain navy or black jacket to school there would be no problem. And anyway if it was plain i think it would looks pretty smart. I dont get why they just dont be reasonable for once, and put us first for once and not the schools 'image.'

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

JK, Oxford says...
8:42pm Wed 11 Feb 09

Yet another example of the standard of literacy of this particular group of friends! Perhaps if they spent more time on their studies and less on trying to fight against the establishment they might be able to put together a couple of sentences that are both grammatically correct and accurately spelt.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

shortenn, Woolstone says...
8:45pm Wed 11 Feb 09

^ i type too fast. deal with it.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Hwatts, Wantage says...
8:49pm Wed 11 Feb 09

"Yet another example of the standard of literacy of this particular group of friends! Perhaps if they spent more time on their studies and less on trying to fight against the establishment they might be able to put together a couple of sentences that are both grammatically correct and accurately spelt."
I dont spend hours writing something like this, if it was a exam, i would look at what im writing , but im just typing.
But to be honest, who's to blame for not teaching us properly?

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

JK, Oxford says...
9:10pm Wed 11 Feb 09

Be proud of everything you write - people will judge you by it especially in a public place like this. Your final sentence shows you can write properly and have been taught well - being lazy when you text or use MSN is one thing but, if you want to win votes, do it properly in this sort of column to get your point across.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

shortenn, Woolstone says...
9:15pm Wed 11 Feb 09

ok ok, its just i feel our teachers are putting the school's image first, before us. And to be honest i really think something should be done about it. We only wear our coats to, from school and in between lessons. What i want to know is WHY they won't let us wear our 'home' coats.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

JK, Oxford says...
9:24pm Wed 11 Feb 09

The reason for a school coat? My guess is because some people don't have a coat at all - or wear something that really isn't good enough for bad weather. By making a compulsory school coat, it's a way of making sure everyone will have something to keep them dry and warm to and from school, and at break times. Ask your school council to get the answer for you and let them fight the battle.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

shortenn, Woolstone says...
9:36pm Wed 11 Feb 09

yehh, ok but im pretty sure everyone can find a decent coat for less than £25.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

kktff, Wantage says...
10:11pm Wed 11 Feb 09

the schools rule for the coats is silly! i had a school coat and i wore it once then i lost it or it got stolen.And i'm not getting a new one. They're horrible anyway! and if the school wants everyone to wear them then they should at least make them cheaper. Me and my friend we're going to the BP garage before school and the vice principal saw my friend with her coat on but before we went to school she left it at my house then when the vice principal asked her about it so she could conviscate it and my friend told her she didnt have it she just wouldn't believe her. Does it matter? she didn't even have it on in the school grounds!

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

vinnie123, Wantage says...
10:49pm Wed 11 Feb 09

Reading the previouse comment from a man who has mocked a childs spelling is pothetic,hary ad nicole who have wrote comments up above are in my tutor group at school and i was talkin to them about it.Sean had every right to refuse to take his coat of.And im not just sticking up for sean because he is one of my main best friends ...its that he is right.i have walked to the other side of wantage in hale,snow,rain storms wen the school have conviscated my coat from me.And then they wonder why im not at school and off with colds and viruses.Something needs to be done! By Vinnie

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

skate17, wantage says...
10:59pm Wed 11 Feb 09

Reading the previouse comment from a man who has mocked a childs spelling is pothetic...is tht aimed at me?,im not mocking a childs spelling...i went to KAs ,dosent that say it all
(yr10/11 we had 8 english teachers)

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Wantage lad02, wantage says...
12:19pm Thu 12 Feb 09

Rules are Rules, stop complaining and deal with it.
If you attended a private school you would have to purchase and wear the uniform !!
it's not a fashion show !!

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

mumo4, Wantage says...
11:22pm Thu 12 Feb 09

Over the last 11yrs King Alfreds have changed the uniform many times. 1st was a shirt & tie with a v neck jumper. then a white polo & black sweatshirt with a gold logo. then blue polo & black sweatshirt but different logo, THEN grey sweatshirts for yr 9 onwards, but then dropped that idea. So NONE of the uniforms I purchased for my children could be passed down. Thus making the kids who wear "last years" uniform a source of ridicule. Which to me defeats the whole object of a school uniform. My point is that a uniform in essence is a good idea if kept consistant, The idea of a coat is a good idea, JUST DONT MAKE IT COMPULSORY!!! The argument that KA's suggest that it is "good value for money" doesn't stand, because kids grow! & what fits in yr 7 usually doesn't fit in yr 8 or 9. It is really dissapointing that the people we entrust our most valuable things, our children are more interested in their image than their minds & education, which is verified by the spelling & grammer of some of our participents. I don't judge them it's the way we live nowadays, with txt spk & spellcheck. Our kids are still our most valuable things and should be cherished not bullied! Please KA's try to think of that a bit more.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

officelady, Oxford says...
2:40pm Fri 13 Feb 09

I agree with the Coopers, why pay for something that won't be used. This item is only to be worn outside occasionally, unlike the rest of the uniform. Yes the school should have their policies, but have some common sense as well. The image and profit is more important than the education of their students. Come on really!

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

officelady, Oxford says...
4:00pm Fri 13 Feb 09

Hey, I thought Ka's didn't allow hoodies. I've just seen a student in sainsburys wearing a black hoodie with a KA logo on it! We all know if a student wore a hoodie to school, they would take it away. So, do as I say not as I do, or don't wear that unless you bought it from us.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Williamhordle, wantage says...
6:34pm Fri 13 Feb 09

The Ka hoodie is part of the KAts scheme. It is an item of the uniform. Non branded hoodies are not.

This thread is a joke. It has started to become a slate the teachers. ITS NOT THE TEACHERS FAULT BUT THE POLICIES. If you want to try and change the policies calling the teachers tw@ts etc... is really not the way to do that.

use you brain and think of a more mature way !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

mumo4, Wantage says...
11:12pm Fri 13 Feb 09

Nobody wants to put our teachers at fault. Mostly, they do a good job. but when they misuse the authority given to them, we must be allowed to challenge it. As parents, we support the school and its policies. We wouldnt leave our children in their care if we didn't. But we have to stick up for the kids when they need us.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

JK, Oxford says...
12:08am Sat 14 Feb 09

It's not that you want to challenge the policy that is at fault, it is the way that some people are going about it. Slagging off teachers who have no choice but to uphold the policy is not the way - all you are doing is teaching your children to disrespect them and authority. And please don't kid yourself that this is about sticking up for the children; it's about the parents' wallets and their decision not to kit their children out in accordance with the prevailing policy. And we have ended up with the children being used as pawns in this disagreement - don't challenge the school on its policies by making your child the piggy in the middle and then whine when they suffer for your decisions. As William Hordle says, find a more mature way!

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

officelady, Oxford says...
1:15pm Sat 14 Feb 09

How wrong can you get it? Most parents would give their last penny for their children, but want some value for their money. If the child wants to wear the coat, by all means buy it. But as I said, why buy something that a child won't wear? and cause all this heartache over making a point. Yes, the children have been made a pawn and a scapegoat here, but it was Sean & his friends that had to walk home in the cold! THAT'S THE POINT a child was made to suffer because his parents hadn't paid the school & helped the profits.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

officelady, Oxford says...
1:21pm Sat 14 Feb 09

PS I don't believe in "slagging off" the teachers either. They are people too & have a difficult job, but shouldn't lose sight of their primary role. Protect & educate young people.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

JK, Oxford says...
1:43pm Sat 14 Feb 09

Don't assume the school makes any profit from the sale of uniform - they are just the intermediary between suppliers and parents. As you say, these children suffered because their parents made the decision not to buy the coat. They are the ones who chose to put their children in that position, who chose to force the school's hand.

And if the school made the unlikely decision to back-track and not make the coat compulsory, the hundreds who had bought the coat would demand their money back. And if they did get their money back, it wouldn't be the supplier but the school who would have to foot the bill out of their funding - end result? the children would suffer as spending would have to be cut elsewhere. Then the suppliers would demand payment for the stock they hold - more money from the budget - probably equates to £25 for EVERY child in the school by this point so £30,000 taken from money that would otherwise be providing textbooks, exercise books, art & science materials etc. Do parents who did buy the coat want their children to suffer through spending cuts because of the actions of a very small minority?

The time to challenge this decision for a school coat is long gone - way back, as Mr Cooper said a few years ago, when the first group of Y7 parents were told about it.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

officelady, Oxford says...
3:48pm Sat 14 Feb 09

How naive of you to think there is no profit. Mr & Mrs Cooper chose not to buy acoat because Sean already had one, again, why pay for something that won't be used. Why would people that have already purchase them want a refund? We dont all think like that, but as we have seen, there has not been a large take up of this item anyway. MOST of the students electing to not wear ANY coat at all.
As I understan Sean is the last of 4 children to attend the school and the coat had not been introduced until he started. So when he has worn it twice & then doesn't fit, the charity shop gets it! thats what KA.s did with the coats in lost property. Why don't they set up a previously owned uniform shop?

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

JK, Oxford says...
4:09pm Sat 14 Feb 09

I'm not the naive one - and where do you think any profit that the school or parents' association might make from any event or sale actually goes? Back into the education of the children!
A 2nd hand shop is a great idea - that should be the role of the parents assoc to set it up - they are the ones that will benefit and I doubt anyone in school has time to run it. Lost property - how long should the school have to store it? - why haven't parents noticed the coat, or other item, is missing and gone into school themselves if their child hasn't gone to look for it? Of course, if all items were named they could be returned to the owner.... At least the school is giving unclaimed clothing to a charity rather than bin it - where, of course, parents can buy it cheaply 2nd hand - all schools that I know do exactly the same with anything left unclaimed at the end of the summer term.
Children not wearing coats - I agree they are not wearing any coat most of the time but I bet the parents are wearing their coats more than twice a year - unfortunately it is not "cool" to wear a coat - which brings us full circle to why a coat is made compulsory .... maybe they should go further and make it complusory to actually wear it as well!!

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Williamhordle, wantage says...
7:42pm Sat 14 Feb 09

Oh my. This really is funny now. He is 14 not 5. So he had to walk home with out a coat.

There are some people in this world who dont have half as much.

Get over it and start putting things into perspective. Your all going on like it was some horific crime. At least he had a warm loving home to go to, some people are not that lucky.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

maverick07, durham says...
5:38pm Sun 15 Feb 09

My children are now in their late 20's but suffered at KA. yes the goverment make the policies but its the teacher who can use their own discretion,They are supposed to be educated people. Any educated person could workout that the child would suffer from the cold.
As for the people that say rules are rules how would you react to knowing that this same school decided that girls were not allowed to wear thongs only knickers and that a few years ago they made two 16 year olds drop the back of their trousers to check. It that rules are rules?
A child that does not wear the school coat to school and home from school is victimised
But when a child that is bullied to the point of feeling suicidal, while walking to and from school by another pupil the parents are told the school has no jurisdiction over pupils on the way to or from school. The reason supplied by head teacher was there is no bulling at his school.
So when the pupil was half strangled at school and needed medical attention you would have thought that was within their jurisdiction , wrong they called my older daughter a pupil at the school at the time and told her what had happened to my son , she was frightened but when she wanted to call me they physically took the money out of her hand that I had given her to call me from the school payphone if she had a problem at school and forbid her to call me, she reversed the charge, when I got to school I was horrified and had to take my son to hospital, school refused to tell me who assaulted my son, you guessed it rules are rules, not the opinion of the police and my sons doctor who made me aware of the alarm and harassment act and the fact that the school have a legal duty of care toward the children as the law sates they are acting in loco parentis (in place of the parent).
So if they are acting in loco parentis they decided to send a child home in the freezing cold, if the biological parent had done that they would be accused of neglect.
Still lets face it these are educated people whom we trust and they know best and rules are rules.
And we are talking about KA what should we expect.
I really want the parents to sue for neglect and distress.

My children are now in their late 20's but suffered at KA. yes the goverment make the policies but its the teacher who can use their own discretion,They are supposed to be educated people. Any educated person could workout that the child would suffer from the cold. As for the people that say rules are rules how would you react to knowing that this same school decided that girls were not allowed to wear thongs only knickers and that a few years ago they made two 16 year olds drop the back of their trousers to check. It that rules are rules? A child that does not wear the school coat to school and home from school is victimised But when a child that is bullied to the point of feeling suicidal, while walking to and from school by another pupil the parents are told the school has no jurisdiction over pupils on the way to or from school. The reason supplied by head teacher was there is no bulling at his school. So when the pupil was half strangled at school and needed medical attention you would have thought that was within their jurisdiction , wrong they called my older daughter a pupil at the school at the time and told her what had happened to my son , she was frightened but when she wanted to call me they physically took the money out of her hand that I had given her to call me from the school payphone if she had a problem at school and forbid her to call me, she reversed the charge, when I got to school I was horrified and had to take my son to hospital, school refused to tell me who assaulted my son, you guessed it rules are rules, not the opinion of the police and my sons doctor who made me aware of the alarm and harassment act and the fact that the school have a legal duty of care toward the children as the law sates they are acting in loco parentis (in place of the parent). So if they are acting in loco parentis they decided to send a child home in the freezing cold, if the biological parent had done that they would be accused of neglect. Still lets face it these are educated people whom we trust and they know best and rules are rules. And we are talking about KA what should we expect. I really want the parents to sue for neglect and distress.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Wantage_321, Wantage says...
9:00pm Mon 16 Feb 09

My child (who has now left school) went to KA'S and it was my worst mistake of my life! My child got treated unfairly and also got BULLIED by MR SPIERS!! This man has no respect for anyone but himself, my child came home numerous of times in tears due to that man. I am outraged at this story with the Coopers- Im with them on this one, who on earth takes a coat off a child in the weather conditions, that it was. Its disgusting! I saw that the school was closed still even when the snow had gone?!? They should care more about the childrens EDUCATION than there uniform! Also when the school had the inspection the teachers were sucking up to my child and making them feel that the school was the best one in the world?!? This is wrong!!!! DO NOT SEND YOUR CHILD TO KA'S. And I hope the Coopers will win this!!!!

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

ham lady, wantage says...
1:07pm Tue 17 Feb 09

my son goes to ka ,he as been told to change is school bag, as it notright for the school hes been told he will be put in the libray till we change it, when will it end ,bring back mr tredell when i was at segsbury we never had this trouble

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Jenny_c, Wantage says...
2:35pm Tue 17 Feb 09

I am Mr. Cooper's youngest daughter and i'm disgusted at what some people are saying!!! King alfreds are more busy concentrating on how students look then what they learn, when i was a student there we actually had differents teachers walk into our lesson and check our uniforms, now which one of you rude people have a decent anwser for why you think it's ok for them to do that. School is a place of education not a fashion show. And not half of the teachers know how do deal with some of their student's like keeping them in a libary, sending them home early for wrong uniforms ect. And for what happened with my little brother being made to walk home in just his jumper only because he didn't have the right coat is stupid! I mean how many parents really want to spend more money on a coat which is only going to be worn for around half a month or so is rediculous especially when another had already been bought which he can wear to school and out side of school. How many students really want to be walking around all the time in a KA's coat? These coats are just another excuse to blag more money for silly little things to put in school, Aka Pink hippo bins which cost £150 each and were ruined on the first day and making it look more like a prison than a school. The school is asking for these kids to get ill and not being able to go to school by making them walk around in just jumper/shirt in the cold. And for the big mouths who want to BLAME my parents for my brother's coat are just as stupid as the school. My parents are better then most parents around here and have done an amazing bring us four up. King alfred's is not a decent place for an education.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Jenny_c, Wantage says...
2:48pm Tue 17 Feb 09

And another thing on the uniform's, when i was at school a friend of mine was out in isolation for wearing a thong! What were the teachers doing looking at her underwear??? And apparently they were make rules on what underwear we could wear! White bra's, no thongs, white or black socks, no make up. What are they doing thinking about our underwear? Shouldn't they be thinking about what we should be learning? And we were going have to have our hair cut the same length and worn up and boys weren't allowed to spike their hair. This is my last question. HOW ON EARTH DOES OUR APPEARENCE EFFECT WHAT WE LEARN OR HOW WE LEARN?!?!?!?! It doesn't.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

SooB, Grove says...
4:13pm Wed 18 Feb 09

If an adult at KA's checked my daughter's underwear to see if she was wearing a thong, I would sue them for sexual assault! They should not be allowed to get away with this.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Richard of Wantage, says...
4:58pm Wed 18 Feb 09

Isn't it about time that the Wantage Herald did some real journalism and reported on what is actually going on at KAs. With pupils reporting bulling and poor educational standards, I think KA's owes its pupils and their parents some explanation.

Report this post » Register/Sign In »

Cold war over coat policy (From The Oxford Times)

News RSS Feed Send your news

Cold war over coat policy

More News stories

Your Say YourOxford

Your sayYour Oxford

Share

Local Advertisers

Local Information

Jobs

Dating

Homes

Cars