• As the constitution of the school's governing body stands, there is to be only one Parent governor representing the views of around 1200 families, one LEA representative, and five Vardy Foundation nominees. This "Board of Directors" will be intended to replace the 2 traditional, and much larger, Governing bodies of Coulby Newham and Brackenhoe schools. As this single parental representative probably will not be elected until after the schools are amalgamated, it apears some form of interim management is governing staffing etc.
• We have conflicting reports as to whether the new school will follow patterns at Emmanuel like a compulsory GCSE Religious Education Examination, and a compulsory course in Philosophy, Theology and Ethics, at A Level.
• Some were not troubled by the idea of a Christian Fundamentalist outlook, but merely by the fact that this may jeopardise students examination chances.
• Others were worried that "Creationist" teaching and "Biblical Literalism" would give children an unrealistic view of the world.
• Some were outraged that a form of "brainwashing" may be taking place.
• There was an overwhelming feeling that the true nature and intentions of the Vardy Foundation had not been fully explained or made clear when the proposal was first made for them to part-fund the Academy, and during the time that the "consultation process" was taking place.
• Perhaps most worrying was the fact that the large proportion of children from "other faith" (I apologise for the phrase) backgrounds who would originally have had a place at Brackenhoe School, could not realistically feel comfortable in a school whose ethos and teaching methods appeared to be outrageously Christian Fundamentalist in Nature.
• The LEA have admitted that they will have very little influence on what goes on in the school, and it appears from the make up of the Board, neither will parents.
• It seems the framework behind City Academies is ill conceived, as it hands over ownership and control of a school to a private or charitable organisation, in return for a relatively small pecuniary contribution. The rest is funded by the state, i.e. our taxes, so we should still have the same rights to voice our concerns and have them addressed as in a conventional school. This is not to say that other Academies won't work. Amey ,the sponsors of Unity Academy appear to have been "up front" about their motives from the start, and whatever you think about businesses running schools for profit, you have to respect them for that.
• There was also concern over proposals to change the length of the school day. Emanuel College students appear to have several extra hours per week at school, and this alone would explain their exam success. But what will this mean for our children? The existing pressure that older students are under often seems excessive as it is. They should be allowed some time of their own, or to spend with their families.
• Certain commitments required of Emmanuel's students and parents have also worried some who have contacted us. Representatives of the Vardy Foundation are constantly at pains to either distance the Academy from Emmanuel, or use it as an example. Which should we believe?

It appeared that the original reasons given by the LEA for entering into the partnership, i.e. to solve the problem of falling roles at Brackenhoe, would certainly not be addressed by a School that would be unattractive to a large proportion of its potential students.

When the the idea of a School with a "Broadly Christian Ethos" was mentioned in passing at the early meetings and literature, we do not believe that sufficient time was given to defining that "ethos".

The Emmanuel College website is very instructive as a means to sharpen that definition, and the College is quite open about its attitude to teaching every subject on the curriculum with reference to the "Absolute Truth" of Biblical Scriptures.

If only John Burn had been open with Parents in Middlesbrough about these attitudes. One wonders why he was not.

More to follow.