We Demand A Vote

To be delivered to senior management as a result of head boy decision. In light of the announcement made on Friday 3rd April, we have prepared the following response. We feel the decision made was not only unjust, but was a knowingly misconceived attempt to rob the students of Wilmington of their democratic voice. The process, riddled with flaws and glaring errors, is an insult to both the student's and staff's integrity but also the history and ethos of the school. 'Non nobis sed communitati'. As a school we enjoy a reputation as a family, as friend's and as a body driven to academic achievement. Indeed one only has to ask a new student why they joined Wilmington leaving schools such as Dartford behind. To undermine one of these foundations is to undermine the Wilmington family. This process and the methodology behind it has done just that. 'Not only for ourselves but for the community' must transcend to all within the school, even the Senior Management Team. How can the leadership team try to instil the ideals of responsibility, enthusiasm and 6th form involvement whilst introducing a process that does nothing but undermine the relationship upon which these foundations are built As a body, this years lower sixth form were assured that they would be the first to participate in a fairer, stronger democratic system. Clearly the students, through sixth form council and their head boy representatives, were lied to. Head of sixth form, Mr Sexton repeatedly stressed the need for a reformed vote that would, and I quote,'lead to direct student involvement'. Unmistakably, this has not been provided. Isn't a Head boy, by its very definition, a student representative and not a figurehead of senior management Clearly this as a principle may wrongly lead to a popularity vote, as has been the case in recent years. However we have moved from a system whereby 120+ people vote on pre-conception's and a short speech replacing it with a system whereby two people vote on their pre-conception's and a narrow focused presentation. We as a student body defy you to tell us this is right. Several candidates were accused of manoeuvring and playing to their strengths particular in reference to proposed debates, questions etc. Yet we can think of nothing more inappropriate than were a winning candidate was originally proposed by 50% of the decision making body. By appointing the Head boy elect his position in the Head boy team and within the student has been undermined, that is a position the senior management team has placed him in not the student body. This predicament has served to support the inadequacy highlighted on the 6th form by our schools most recent Ofsted report. Whilst the GSGW and WEC were awarded 2s for 'care, guidance and support' and 'Leadership and management' in reference to the 6th form, we as a school were awarded a satisfactory 3. Does the senior management team really believe that this decision will strengthen the 6th form or serve to further undermine it The appointment of four deputy Head boys and 4 Assistant Head boy's has highlighted to the student body the farcical nature of the process and the lack of a competent and confident decision. We the undersigned feel that this system has proved to be nothing more than an odious piece of hypocritical, supercilious, arrogant rubbish and as such we demand the following: -A retraction in the offer of all position in the Head boy team and have them decided by a vote. -A voting system similar to that originally promised although we ask the leadership team to consider whether all years should have a vote -A full transparency in all decision making from this point on. -A full apology from those responsible for this farce and the attempt to introduce the decision at a time when there was no availability of protest. Failure to deliver or enter into a period of negations on these demands by 9am tomorrow morning will result in action being taken. Further failure to deliver by Friday 24th April will lead to increased action. We the undersigned. Electoral System as promised by Mr Sexton: Round 1: Candidates must submit a written statement on why they should be Head boy with a complete nomination form. Round 2: Selected candidates will participate in a group discussion and present a 5-10 minute presentation to Head of 6th form, Headteacher and a selected governor. Round 3: From round 2, the best candidates (suggested 5) will give a presentation/speech to the year 12 student body. We ask the Senior Management Team to consider if it is just year 12 that should vote. Round 4: If 5 candidates were selected for the student election, the top 3 would then give a presentation to all staff members who would then vote. Decision: Both results form the basis of the decision to ensure the most popular and appropriate candidate is awarded the position. Both results must be published to the student body immediately after counting.

Sponsor

n/a

Links

n/a

Discussion

No comments yet.

join the discussion

Recent signatures

  • username

    William SamuelsUnited Kingdom

    5 years ago
  • username

    Jill SavilleUnited Kingdom

    5 years ago
  • username

    Nick LarkinsUnited Kingdom

    5 years ago
See more

Petition highlights

There are no highlights yet.