Link below to the minutes from the Parent Council Meeting
Link below to the minutes from the Parent Council Meeting
Link below to the minutes from the Parent Council Meeting.
Link below to the minutes from the Parent Council Meeting 15.09.16
Link below to minutes from Parent Council 12.05.16
Link below to minutes from Parent Council 17.03.16
Link below to minutes from Parent Council 28.01.16
Link below to minutes from Parent Council 10.12.15
Link below to minutes from Parent Council 29.10.15
Link below to minutes from parent council 19.05.15
Link below to minutes from Parent Council meeting from 26.03.15
Our Lady of the Missions Primary School Parent Council
Minutes of Parent Council Meeting
11th December 2014
- Boyle, A. Forsyth, C. Jamieson, M-C. Darroch, M. O’Reilly, J. Heraghty, L. Garety, P. Hessett, J. Taggart, C. James, S. Morrison, R. Spooner, E. Holland, G. Devenney, Cllr Robertson, Cllr Montague
Cllr Waters, Cllr Fletcher, Cllr Wallace, J. Harkins, C. McCudden, C. Bowes, J. McLachlan, M. Hynes, F. McKean
Approval of the Minutes for the October 2014 Meeting
Proposed- G. Boyle
Seconded- M-C. Darroch
- Jamieson spoke about the National Parent Forum which involves representatives from schools within and outwith East Renfrewshire. Our Lady of the Missions is keen to find new ways to engage parents to create a real partnership with them. A questionnaire had been sent out earlier in the year to learn how satisfied parents are with their children’s education. This survey is carried out every four years within the authority and the council feeds back the results to the school. 130 of 200 questionnaires were returned to the school, which was a good return. C. Jamieson showed a table with the results of the questionnaire.
The lower percentages came in questions about asking parents’ views and taking the views of parents into account. The same dip occurs in these questions in schools throughout the authority. A lower percentage also occurred in questions about the transition of pupils from nursery to primary, from primary to secondary and from one year to another.
- Spooner asked whether, when a child moves from one teacher to another, the new teacher has read a report on each child or whether it’s a blank slate. C. Jamieson said that information is transferred about every pupil and that work is carried out during In Service days to transfer information about pupils.
M-C. Darroch said that sometimes teachers have not known information about a child at a Parents Evening that should have been known. C. Jamieson replied that it would be valuable to generate ideas as to how to improve the teachers’ knowledge about the children. He said that the new teacher spends an afternoon with the class before the new school year to make sure the children are comfortable and has a written file which they will be expected to have read.
- James suggested putting the school’s policy document regarding the handover of information between teachers onto the website.
- Boyle asked whether the information passed on to teachers is a summarised report or a fuller account and she suggested that it might be helpful for parents to have the opportunity to bullet-point some information that they think the teacher should know about their child. She also said that producing an overview of the main events of each year group at the start of the year could prove useful. This is done in St Joseph’s primary school.
- Hessett suggested each child writing a letter about themselves for the new teacher could be helpful. C. Jamieson replied that the upper school pupils maintain an e-portfolio with personal information that the teacher can access. S. Morrison said that perhaps the pupils could write a transition memo for the pupils in the year below, describing the year ahead.
- Jamieson said that the recent Support and Protection Review looked at how well the P7 teachers knew their pupils and looked at how teachers build a relationship with the pupils.
- Spooner said that the transition programme for the P7s progressing to St Ninian’s was great. C. Jamieson gave credit to G. O’Neil in St Ninian’s who also works on this programme.
- Garety referred to the interaction between OLM and Glenwood and asked about the level of contact with other nurseries in the area. C. Jamieson said that there was a close liasion with Glenwood, Glen Family Centre, Netherlee and Thornliebank. There is also contact with nurseries in other areas and information about children is acquired from them. The school now requires to liaise with [22?] nurseries feeding children into the school. A baseline assessment is carried out early in Primary 1.
- Holland noted that in some schools the children write self-reports on their report cards. C. Jamieson said that this was done in P6 and 7 and that feedback is received from the children after their report cards have been issued.
- Holland asked whether there were any special arrangements for the transition of children with additional needs into St Ninian’s, such as a settling-in course during the summer break. C. Jamieson replied that there is a course that takes place during the last week of the summer term but that some children do not wish to make use of it.
- Taggart suggested that part of the difficulty of children moving from nursery to primary school was that parents lose the face-to-face contact with teachers that they are used to in nursery. She said that some of the Glasgow schools involve parents in paired reading in the classroom. C. Jamieson said that the school had run something similar before and that it would be worth looking at that again.
- Boyle said that it might be useful if class teachers were to bring children out at the end of the day at the beginning of term to allow parents to see teachers as sometimes parents know nothing about the teachers until the Meet the Teacher evening later in the first term. C. Jamieson said that all staff are used in different capacities at the end of the school day. E. Holland said that the Meet the Teacher evening was a good idea as many working parents are not at the school during the day.
- Spooner raised the issue of phoning the school to speak to a classroom teacher and those calls being answered by deputes. C. Jamieson said it was not the usual practice for parents to be able to speak to classroom teachers in the first instance but that an appointment for a phone call could be made. R. Spooner said that this might be a factor in parents feeling that their views are not taken into account.
- Hessett said that it is sometimes possible to speak to teachers after school but that there might be privacy issues surrounding that type of discussion.
- Boyle proposed that an openness to arranging parent-teacher phone calls could be welcomed by working parents who are not at the school. C. James suggested that if parents were encouraged to phone with any concerns at all rather than simply with a more serious concern, this might encourage parents to feel more involved. She also said that other teachers could be present at the Headteacher’s Drop-In meetings. C. Jamieson said that perhaps principal teachers or depute heads could have similar drop in meetings on a semi-regular basis. A. Forsyth noted that one of the pastoral care staff from St Ninian’s phones parents to discuss how children are settling in.
- Spooner suggested e-mail contact with teachers. E. Holland said that in some schools parents can contact staff via an enquiries e-mail address which is then passed on to the relevant member of staff.
- O’Reilly said that perhaps some form of interim report could be sent out to parents earlier in the first term to flag up any potential concerns.
- Taggart drew attention to the National Parent Forum document where it is indicated that interaction between staff and parents is as important as between staff and children.
- Spooner said that the extra-curricular clubs run by P. McCann were a big contribution to the school.
- Boyle suggested that perhaps parents could be issued with a form in advance of Parents Evenings asking about anything they would like to discuss with teachers so that discussions can be more focussed.
Our Lady of the Missions Primary School Parent Council
Minutes of Parent Council Meeting
23rd October 2014
G. Boyle, A. Forsyth, C. Jamieson, M- C. Darroch, M. O’Reilly, K. Kelly, C. Bowes, Cllr Waters, J. Heraghty, C. McCudden, G. Bhatti, J. McLachlan, Cllr Fletcher, J. Devlin, L. Garety, M. Cluckie, J. Harkins, P. Hessett, M. Hynes, F. McKean, C. McLaughlin, M. Moore, B. Docherty, G. Devenney, Cllr Robertson, C. Houston
J. Taggart, Cllr McAskill, S. Morrison, C. James, E. Holland, R. Spooner
Approval of the Minutes for the AGM (September 2014)
Proposed- J. Heraghty
Seconded- J. McLachlan
Update on Transition
C. Jamieson said that work was continuing within the Junior Department building, with changes continuing to be made, such as the music room being moved downstairs and new carpets being put down. Further work will be required following the knock-through, including internal work for wheelchair access. Father Hill had blessed the building.
The tower is beginning to take shape and D. Leask has given a date of 21st December for the completion of the corridor which links in to the medical room. No date was yet known for when Clark Contracts will leave the site. C. Houston suggested that the work is unlikely to be completed on time and said that this would have an impact on the budget. C. Jamieson said that he had contacted D. Leask to arrange a meeting to discuss the budget. Cllr Waters said that overruns would cost extra money and that things had been added since the original tender. He added that other money had been provided towards the costs of making the work DDA-compliant. Currently there was £70,000 left of the budget, but by the time the work is completed, the figure will likely be closer to £40,000.
A. Forsyth noted that the school’s wishes regarding the use of any underspend should be made known. C. Houston said that an opportunity had been missed now that the weather was changing.
P. Hessett asked about how icy conditions on the stairs between the buildings would be handled. C. Jamieson replied that the upper building has always been made accessible by the janitors so that he did not anticipate any problems. The path that runs up to Glenwood nursery is not cleared by the janitors. C. McCudden said it might be useful to advise parents to use the steps in icy weather.
C. Jamieson noted that the changing weather will affect the movement of children between the buildings
Consultation on Joint-Faith Campus
G. Boyle said that the ERC proposal is to reduce St Cadoc’s primary by one stream (becoming 2 streams) and building a new school in Newton Mearns which would also be 2 streams (one moved from St Cadcos and one completely new stream to reflect housebuilding in the area). This would mean St Ninian’s would have 10 streams feeding directly into the school from cluster schools. The concern is the long-term impact on numbers for St Ninian’s, though it is difficult to judge / dispute the projected figures without more detailed information. St Ninian’s is already a ten-stream school but not all pupils are from the catchment area and there is a proportion of placing requests.
J. Heraghty asked about a contingency plan if the numbers are not right. Cllr Fletcher replied that the numbers have been looked at carefully and that new housing on the Glasgow side has not been included in the calculations. He added that St Ninian’s is big enough on the current model but that migration cannot be predicted. A. Forsyth suggested the numbers would be close to the wire. Cllr Robertson said that the number of placing requests would be reduced to accommodate catchment pupils.
M. Moore referred to the new house-building within the catchment. C. Houston noted that in East Dumbartonshire the predictions were out by over one hundred pupils. Cllr Waters replied that the ERC model is different and that the numbers have always hit close to the predicted figures but that there will always be factors that cannot be predicted.
G. Bhatti referred to the new housing in Newton Mearns and whether St Cadoc’s could accommodate the numbers.
C. McLaughlin said that the council would have a responsibility to provide a denominational education so that if St Ninian’s were to reach its capacity, another school would need to be provided. A. Forsyth asked whether rezoning would be considered. Cllr Robertson replied that the schools are full because they are so successful and that there are currently hundreds of placing requests. G. Boyle said that it was likely that placing requests would become more difficult to secure and that parents should be advised that a second application would need to be made at the end of primary school. C. Jamieson said that it is made clear to parents that a second placing request would require to be made in P7. He added that these second placing requests are usually successful but that there will be fewer successful requests in the future.
M-C. Darroch asked about the percentage of placing requests. G. Boyle said that about 400 of the pupils at St Ninian’s are there through placing requests.
C. Houston asked whether there was any commitment to upgrade the primary schools in line with Section 75 commitments, where money is being spent on additional secondary school places. Cllr Waters said that any money would come from the Education Department budget. Cllr Fletcher referred to the substantial number of placing requests and to the pressure points in denominational schools. He said that if additional places were required, the Catholic Church would need to ask for a new school.
M. O’Reilly asked whether a plan was in place to deal with any over-subscription to St Ninian’s from catchment pupils. Cllr Waters said that a new school would not be built unless there were statistics to prove that it was necessary. Cllr Fletcher said that the decision to build a new school lies with government ministers but that there is a legal responsibility to provide denominational education.
G. Boyle drew attention to the £13.6 million budget for the joint-faith school when no money was available for a new building for OLM. Cllr Robertson said that there had to be a new school where it was needed. Cllr Waters said that the new school will require a large amount of money from ERC’s capital reserves. He added that when a new primary is requested, the condition of the existing building is taken into account. He explained that some of the funding for the new joint-faith school has come from contributions from developers and from the sale of Calderwood Lodge. St Cadoc’s had twelve more catchment pupils than there were places for and additional pupils are anticipated from new housing.
C. Jamieson said that there was only one placing-request for a sibling of pupils in the current P1 but that there are some in the upper school.
G. Boyle referred to the public meeting to be held at Mearns Primary on 29th October. There is also an online survey for residents.
National Parent Forum Report
J. McLachlan spoke about the National Parent Forum which seeks to provide a link between the Government and Parent Councils. A report had recently been produced by the Parent Forum regarding assessing and reporting. The report had been presented at the Scottish Learning Festival. It is available on the Parent Forum website.
A survey had been carried out asking parents’ opinions on what assessment is. C. Jamieson added that discussion on these issues had taken place at headteacher level within the authority. A great deal of positive suggestions had come from East Renfrewshire schools. It is hoped to improve communication with parents regarding pupil progress by using methods other than just the end-of-year report.
Minutes of the Our Lady of the Missions Parent Council AGM
11th September 2014
C. Jamieson, G. Boyle, A. Forsyth, M. O’Reilly, L. Garety, C. James, J. Taggart, R. Spooner, Cllr Waters, Cllr Robertson, Cllr McAskill, M. Moore, M-C. Darroch, C. McCudden, K. Kelly, F. McKean, C. McLaughlin, M. Cluckie, P. Hessett, G. Bhatti, M. Hynes, J. Heraghty, C. Bowes, J. Harkins, S. Morrison, E. Holland, J. McLachlan
C. Jamieson explained that the Meet the Teacher evening had gone well. He said that a lot of work had been done in the new building over the summer and that the additional space was very welcome. There are plans to look at how best to use the building and changes would continue to be made in the allocation of space where necessary.
The garden area has been cleared by the council and the Gardening Club has begun planting. It was noted that it would be important to be mindful of local residents when large number of pupils are using this space.
Additional works are planned to take place during the October break and more work will be carried out after the breakthrough to the new building. The cafeteria will be replaced and the kitchen will be renewed as part of preparations for free school meals for p1 to 3 in 2015.
C. Jamieson has put fire evacuation plans into every classroom, including for those pupils with additional needs.
M. O’Reilly asked about whether there were any plans to freshen up the canopied area beside the P4 door. C. Jamieson replied that this would be painted.
M. Moore asked about signs for the new building. C. Jamieson said that new signs had been ordered.
J. Heraghty asked about the timeframe for the completion of the corridor. C. Jamieson replied that he had been in contact with R. O’Kane of ERC and that the tower was taking shape but that the project is running a few weeks behind schedule. It is hoped that this time will be made up and that the corridor will be completed by late November, early December. Cllr McAskill noted that it would be reasonable to expect that the time lost could be recovered.
Discussions with ERC will include the issue of levelling the ground and any development of the land that might take place if there is any money left over from the original budget. C. Jamieson added that in view of the cost of creating the access road, it might be more cost-efficient to make use of the aggregate that has been brought in. The accounts will be scrutinized in October and in addition a capital bid has been submitted. There has been no problem with drainage at this stage.
C. Jamieson spoke about the removal of one of the huts and noted that the ground was already prepared underneath. An all-weather play area could potentially be established there but this was just one idea of many that could be considered once we are in a position to start planning what is feasible for the area. Applications will be made for additional grants to fund further development if necessary.
R. Spooner asked whether a decision would be made on the capital bid before the current project was finished. Cllr Waters replied that a decision would not be made until after Christmas and that the work would be put out to tender anyway.
C. Jamieson was hopeful that there would be money left over as some savings had been made.
C. Jamieson said that staff had been working hard to make the two buildings work. He said that children were enjoying having to queue for a shorter time for lunch and J. McGrotty added that there was a relaxed feeling and more time for staff to catch up with the children.
J. Taggart asked whether there was any indoor space that could be used for wet plays. C. Jamieson replied that a rota could perhaps be put into place. The gym hall is used for packed lunches but the forum or ICT suite could be used. A covered outdoor area was also suggested.
L. Garety asked about the children missing gym when the hall is set up for other activities. C. Jamieson said that teachers had been encouraged to take children outdoors for gym when the weather is suitable.
R. Spooner asked about Woodfarm Pavilion. C. Jamieson said that this was no longer used.
Our Lady of the Missions Primary School Parent Council
Minutes of Meeting – 29 May 2014
Gillian Boyle, Anne Forsyth, Charlie Jamieson, Marie-Claire Darroch, Mary O’Reilly, Callum Houston, Karen Kelly, Clare Bowes, Cllr Waters, Cllr McCaskill, J. Taggart, C. James, J. Heraghty, R. Spooner, M, McAlpine, C. McCudden, G. Bhatti, J. McLachlan, Cllr Fletcher, N. Salim, J. Devlin, P. Hessett, L. Garety, R. O’Kane
M. Moore, Cllr Montague, Cllr Robertson, A. Friel , A.Hussain
Approval of the Minutes for the March PC Meeting
Proposed- G. Boyle
Seconded- J. Taggart
Update on Transition
C. Jamieson spoke about continuing to keep parents of OLM, Robslee and Glenwood nursery informed about the progression of the work to build the link corridor. He said he would ensure that this was done smoothly. He added that he and his staff are currently organising the transition to the new building, ensuring that the resources required for P4 and P5 will be packed up and transferred. He said that some new furniture would be ordered and that the new building would be ready for use in August.
Plans have been made for the vacant spaces and there will be some reallocation of space.
C. McCudden asked whether the P4 and 5 children would be told what to do on the first day. C. Jamieson replied that he would inform parents about which doors were to be used. He said that normally children would be introduced to their new teachers and classrooms before the end of term and that signs are usually put up outside the doors to guide pupils at the beginning of the new term.
M. McAlpine asked whether a fire drill would be carried out at the beginning of term in the new building. C. Jamieson replied that it would not be done too early in the new term as it can be daunting for the younger pupils. He said that pupils would be told about the exits in the new building.
R. Spooner asked about the huts. C. Jamieson replied that he hoped to keep one of them for use as a science or home economics classroom.
L. Garety asked whether teacher allocation had been done for next term. C. Jamieson said that it had been finalised but that teachers and pupils had not yet been informed. He added that there would be three Newly Qualified Teachers next term, one more than expected, which means that additional support practices can be offered.
L. Garety asked whether the new P4 and 5 pupils would get to visit their new classrooms in the new building. C. Jamieson said that this might not be possible.
C. McCudden asked whether a name had been decided upon for the new building and suggested referring to it as the middle school.
Raymond O’Kane, of Property and Technical Services, addressed the PC regarding the building work on the new link corridor. He said that it had been a Design and Build contract and that the design had been approved by the Education department before the contract had been awarded. He said that work had begun and that access to the building work was through the Robslee car park. Construction work will be confined to the middle area between the two buildings until the end of term, then the major break-through work will take place during the summer. A central tower will be build and the work is due to be finished by mid-November, this being a 26-week contract.
He explained that the materials to be used for the corridor are still to be approved by ERC and that the contractors were following the normal procedures in applying for the necessary building warrant. The corridor will be a timber kit manufacturedoff-site. He said that the link corridor will have heating, lighting and windows and that the cabling for the two schools would be contained within it. It will be an enclosed route which will be DDA-compliant. There will be some additional work at the entry point to Robslee to make it DDA-compliant as there is a variance in levels at the entrance there. He noted that the Health and Safety plan had been approved.
G. Bhatti asked whether it would be useful to have CCTV cameras in the corridor. C. Jamieson said this would not be necessary. R. O’Kane added that there would be security alarms.
K. Kelly questioned R. O’Kane’s reference to associated works in Robslee. R. O’Kane explained that the contractors would make the corridor DDA-compliant where the corridor enters Robslee but would not be making the entire building accessible to those with disabilities. C. Jamieson said that there will be one child using a wheelchair who will be based in the Robslee building who will have access only to the ground floor.
P. Hessett asked how the Robslee building will be accessible to those with disabilities in the period until the corridor is finished. C. Jamieson replied that alternative arrangements would be made for those two months.
Our lady of the Missions Primary School Parent Council
Minutes for the OLM Parent Council Meeting – 13th March 2014
Gillian Boyle, Anne Forsyth, Michelle Hynes, Charlie Jamieson, Gerry Devenney, Marie-Claire Darroch, Mary O’Reilly, Callum Houston, Karen Kelly, Clare Bowes, Cllr Waters, Cllr Robertson, Cllr McCaskill, J. Taggart, C. James, J. Heraghty, A. Friel, R. Spooner, M, McAlpine
Cllr Wallace, N. Salim, M. Moore, Cllr Fletcher, G. Bhatti, L. Garety, J. McLachlan
It was noted that P. Rogers had tendered her resignation from the Parent Council
Approval of the Minutes for the January PC Meeting
Proposed- C. Bowes
Seconded- J. Heraghty
Update on Transition
C. Jamieson explained that D. Leask had informed him that the tenders for the building work were in and were being scrutinised. He said that he did not yet know who the contractor would be and did not yet have a start date but that he had been advised that the start of the work would be imminent and that a perimeter fence for security was already being erected in the Robslee campus. He added that there would be two ways to access routes from OLM to Glenwood without having to cut through Robslee.
Cllr Waters said that a winning bid had been chosen and that the details were being finalised.
C. Jamieson said that he had brought up with D. Leask the issue of the masonry bees at Robslee. He added that he hoped to visit the Robslee building again after Easter, when he would know what money was still available.
A. Forsyth drew attention to the reduced time for the building work to be completed.
C. Houston asked whether the school had been consulted about awarding the contract. Cllr Waters replied that procurement laws prevented that and that three officers judged the contracts. C. Houston went on to note that the school , had not therefore seen what was in the contract since it was a Design and Build contract that went out to tender. Cllr Waters said that although it was a Design and Build contract, it had a very detailed specification.
K. Kelly asked whether the contract had been awarded to the lowest bidder. Cllr Waters replied that there was a price/ quality balance. Cllr Robertson added that each bid would be marked on certain criteria which would have been included in the specification.
C. Houston emphasised the need for good quality and said that the building material would be important. Cllr Waters said that samples of the proposed building materials were often included with the tender. The contractor is picked from a council list. He expected that the tenders would be less than the budget.
K. Kelly noted the two different aesthetics of the OLM and Robslee buildings and queried how a building material would be chosen to blend the two together. Cllr Waters replied that that was the role of D. Leask, who has responsibility for all of the school buildings.
Cllr Robertson said that the bids would be checked to ensure that they meet the specifications. C. Houston noted that contractors could find a way round this in the way they write their tenders. C. Jamieson said that the drawings of the architect had been available and so the tender should be in line with what was asked for.
Cllr Waters explained that he had not seen the winning contract or the full specification but he envisaged that the clerking of the work would have to be a daily or weekly exercise. He also stated that agency staff could be used to prevent slippage.
R. Spooner asked about the clerking of the work. Cllr Waters replied that the clerk would check in with C. Jamieson. R. Spooner also asked whether the text of the winning bid would be available to view. He was told that it would not.
G. Devenney asked whether, in the system of the preferred list, a contractor could be removed if they failed to provide work of a suitable standard. Cllr Waters replied that they could.
A. Friel asked whether the new building would be given a new name. C. Jamieson replied that it would not be given a separate name as such but that it would need to be identified in some way so that the 2 areas of the campus could be distinguished from one another.
A. Forsyth asked about how the project would be delivered on time. C. Houston asked if there was a contingency plan if the work was not finished in time for August. He noted that there were still building procedures that would have to completed before work can begin. Cllr Waters replied that the time scale would be finalised after the award of the contract has been completed but that there might still be snagging work that will need to be completed after August. G. Boyle asked for more specific detail about what the snagging period might entail. Cllr Waters said that he anticipated only small jobs needing to be completed and that the school would need to function round this work being finished. He added that if there is a delay and the tender is under budget, then there might be the finance available to get the project back on track.
C. Houston asked whether paying for acceleration would come out of the budget and whether that would be to the detriment of paying for other things. Cllr Waters explained that the way the capital budget works, any money not spent on the link corridor will go back into the pot and does not automatically refer to the school. However, a further decision at a political level could be made to allocate further funds if this was felt necessary / appropriate.
K. Kelly asked whether the contractor would be obliged to reinstate the landscaping as it is. Cllr Waters replied that some landscaping would probably be included. Cllr Robertson stated that if it was not included, the council would be able to do some landscaping work. He added that by the time of the last Parent Council meeting of the session in June, there would be a better idea of whether the project was on track.
Our Lady of the Missions Parent Council
Minutes of Meeting
30th January 2014
Gillian Boyle, Anne Forsyth, Michelle Hynes, Charlie Jamieson, Mary Moore, Gerry Devenney, Marie-Claire Darroch, Brendan Docherty, Jackie Devlin, Mary O’Reilly, Lesley Garety, Callum Houston, Karen Kelly, Gary Bhatti, Joe McLachlan, Peter Hesset, Christine McCudden, Clare Bowes, Josephine McGrotty, Nadia Salim, Cllr Waters, Cllr Fletcher, Cllr Montague, Cllr Robertson, Cllr McAskill, Cllr Wallace
A. Hussain, J. Taggart, A. Friel, P. Rogers, R. Spooner, C. James, M. McBryde, J. Heraghty
Approval of the Minutes for the December PC Meeting
Proposed- G. Boyle
Seconded- G. Bhatti
Update on Transition
C. Jamieson had received updates from F. Morrison and H. DeLombardi, stating that the tender was due back on 7th February and that the contract would be issued by late February/ early March, allowing time for the job to be finished by August.
C. Jamieson had had a walk around the Robslee building with a view to assessing what furniture and fittings would be required as most current furniture etc is being removed. He noted that eight classes would be available in the new building, five on the ground floor and three on the upper floor. There is also an assembly hall and stage, a cafeteria, two support-for-learning bases and some offices. There are also some large classrooms and a computer suite. He indicated that one hut may be retained.
Following extensive discussion by staff in the school, it is proposed that P4 and P5 pupils will be accommodated in the new building. It was felt best not to move P1-3 into the new building because thirteen classrooms would be required to accommodate P1-3, with five P1 classes next session.
It is anticipated that there will be regular movement between the two buildings, such as for IT and gym. This is particularly true for the P7 pupils in view of their responsibilities as mentors and wet-play / lunch monitors. It is hoped that the P 5- 7 pupils will benefit from increased computer time following the transition.
C. Jamieson added that there are some smaller spaces in the new building that will prove useful too.
C. McCudden asked about the current P6 and P7 classrooms and whether there would now be no double bases. C. Jamieson replied that one partitioned room had been sound-proofed and would continue to be used but that the other two partitioned rooms would be used as bases.
C. Jamieson suggested that House assemblies might be a way of bringing together children who are in different buildings. It is also hoped that children will be able to move between playgrounds at break times. He also said that there would be clerical, janitorial and catering staff in both buildings.
M-C. Darroch asked whether the gym hall in the new building is smaller and whether it would continue to be used by Glenwood. C. Jamieson replied that Glenwood would continue to use the gym hall. He added that having the extra gym space would enable pupils to have two indoor PE sessions per week and only one outdoors.
OUR LADY OF THE MISSIONS PRIMARY SCHOOL
Minutes for the OLM Parent Council Meeting – 12th December 2013
Gillian Boyle, Anne Forsyth, Michelle Hynes, Judy Taggart, Catriona James, Veronica Dowling, Charlie Jamieson, Mary Moore, Gerry Devenney, Marie-Claire Darroch, Roger Spooner, Brendan Docherty, Jackie Devlin, Mary O’Reilly, Lesley Garety, Maureen McAlpine, Callum Houston, Karen Kelly, Gary Bhatti, Amir Hussain, Angela Friel, Cllr Mary Montague, Cllr Ralph Robertson
Cllr Fletcher, Cllr Wallace, Cllr McAskill, Cllr Waters, P. Hessett, C. McCudden, J. McLachlan
Approval of the Minutes for the November PC Meeting
Proposed- G. Boyle
Seconded- J. Devlin
A. Hussain noted that his apologies for the November meeting had been omitted.
Update on Traffic Sub-group
B. Docherty spoke about the success of Road Safety week. St Ninian’s pupils had helped take the children on safety walks, a pedestrian crossing had been set up in the gym hall and the pupils took part in a competition to design a sign, details of which are on the school website. G. Brown will provide the money to make and install the winning sign. A parking guide, written by the junior Road Safety Officers, was also issued to parents. This is also available to view on the website.
C. Jamieson added that Cllr Montague had made inquiries about some of the traffic issues around the school but had not heard anything back. C. Jamieson had also discussed with the Clerk of Works about making some improvements but will have to approach D. Leask for funding. This work will include some tree trimming, the reprinting of old signs and the painting of new ones. The work agreed by G. Brown will likewise require funding from D. Leask.
A. Friel asked whether the changes already in place had made a noticeable difference at the drop off area. C. Jamieson replied that there had been no recent complaints on the matter.
L. Garety said that she had witnessed the situation where cars lingering in the drop off zone were preventing the buses from parking and G. Bhatti noted that people were continuing to park despite the new signs.
M. McAlpine asked whether it might be worth putting leaflets on those cars that park in the drop off area. C. Jamieson replied that perhaps the pupils could design something to be used in that manner. B. Docherty added that this had been considered before but that it was not done in view of the risk of damaging cars.
M. Moore said that because of the congestion, it was difficult not to double park, even when just dropping off children in the morning.
C. Jamieson explained that some spaces in the drop off area have been reserved for staff parking and that perhaps parents were copying this. He suggested it might be worth putting signs up to show which spaces were for staff parking. J. Taggart added that the spaces beside the staff spaces might be painted with yellow hatches rather than leaving them to look like they are spaces to be parked in.
G. Bhatti drew attention to the problem of dropping off children at a point where there is no gap to allow them to get onto the pavement. He said that in that case, parents are likely to get out of their cars to take their children to a gateway.
R. Spooner, having commended the older pupils who had been helping at the nativity plays, wondered if those older pupils could also be sent out to discourage drivers from parking where they shouldn’t, especially at busy school events. C. Jamieson said that the Junior Road Safety Officers could do that, if they were accompanied by staff.
M. McAlpine referred to the parking issues in Berryhill Drive, with cars parking on both sides of the road.
A. Friel noted that neither of the two Woodfarm car parks is very busy in the morning.
L. Garety said that there was unusual congestion on the days of the nativity plays, heightened when such events coincided with Woodfarm’s early end. J. Taggart wondered whether a text could be send to remind parents of potential problems on unusually busy days.
M. O’Reilly mentioned the problem of cars waiting around the school areas and leaving their engines running. R. Spooner added that it was illegal to do so. G. Bhatti said that this could be a risk for children playing in the cages.
Nadia Salim, Mary O’Reilly, Gillian Boyle, Anne Forsyth, Michelle Hynes, Judy Taggart, Clare Bowes, Catriona James, Cllr McCaskill, Cllr Robertson, Cllr Montague, Cllr Wallace, Joe McLachlan, Veronica Dowling, Charlie Jamieson, Paula Rogers, Mary Moore, Gerry Devenney, Marie-Claire Darroch, Christine McCudden, Roger Spooner, Brendan Docherty, Jackie Devlin, Josephine McGrotty, Peter Hessett, Jo Heraghty
Callum Houston, Angela Friel, Brian Hughes, Maureen McAlpine, Karen Kelly, Lesley Garety, Gary Bhatti
Approval of the Minutes for the September PC Meeting
Proposed- J. Taggart
Seconded- P. Rogers
A. Forsyth explained that parents had not been given the required two weeks notice of the date of the PC meeting. A vote was then taken to approve the meeting taking place at short notice. Continue reading November 2013 Parent Council Minutes
Anne Forsyth, Gillian Boyle, Charles Jamieson, Veronica Dowling, Mary O’Reilly, Cllr Jim Fletcher, Lesley Garety, Clare Bowes, Josephine McGrotty, Catriona James, Christine McCudden, Cllr Vincent Waters, Cllr Gordon Wallace, Judy Taggart, Roger Spooner, Gerry Devenney, Joe McLachlan, Mary Moore, Callum Houston, Angela Friel, Jackie Devlin, Paula Rogers, Gary Bhatti, Amir Hussain, Peter Hessett, Cllr Ralph Robertson, Cllr Gordon McCaskill, Maureen McAlpine, Jo Heraghty, Karen Kelly, Marie-Claire Darroch, Nadia Salim
Cllr Mary Montague
Approval of the Minutes for the June PC Meeting
Proposed- G. Boyle
Seconded- C. McCudden
Update on Communications Sub-group
G. Boyle spoke about the transition to e-mail as a means of communication and about the plan to set up a Facebook page for the Parent Council. It is planned also to establish a protocol for communication between the school and the parent forum. Continue reading October 2013 Parent Council Minutes