Letter to DfES for Editing

A draft letter to the DfES re Tyndale Academy
Below you will find the text of a letter I am intending to send to the DfES and various educationists and newspapers in the next few days.
My aim? To ensure that the actions and motives of the Department for Education and Skills are open to the sort of public scrutiny which will cause them to act with the kind of caution that has been lacking in their dealings with us up to this point - some hope??

Any amendments or suggestions gratefully received. - Post away - Ideally I'd like it to be one page of A4 only


Dear Ms Jones,
I write this letter in order to appeal to you to rectify what has been a sorry tale of incompetence, bullying and prevarication on the part of your Department.


Tyndale Academy -Who we are & Where we are
Tyndale Academy is a small independent tuition Group operating in the London Borough of Newham. In terms of educational provision Newham is one of the poorest performing Local Authorities in the country. Our group was set up to provide an alternative to the low expectations and poor discipline that have blighted the education of so many in our borough. After receiving advice from the DfES in 1998 we set up the Tyndale Academy and have provided a broad and balanced curriculum for up to 11 children in classes of no more than six. We noted the definition of full-time used by the DfES (DfES Circular 7/90)and as such have always operated for substantially fewer than the 21 hours which the Department has set as the lower limit which independent schools are "expected to follow" as "minima" (Guidance for Proprietors of Independent Schools - DfES 2005). For this reason we fully expected to be treated as providing what the law calls "education otherwise than at school". Your department has stubbornly sought to limit the scope and meaning of "education otherwise" to "home education" whereas a plain reading of the legislation will not do that.


DfES campaign against Tyndale culminating in threat of prosecution and Consultation
You will know that we came to the attention of the DfES in July 2003 through an advert in our local paper. Since then constant inquiries by your Dept have made our situation intolerable. You sought to ascertain what our hours of operation were. We informed you of these and you were at the point of recognising that these hours were not sufficient to justify calling us full-time providers. As a result of the interference and encouragement of our Local Authority you changed course and determinedly aimed at getting us to register as an Independent School. You have sent two senior Inspectors of Schools from OFSTED to visit us to make a determination about our status. Although they went against their own guidance in making their determination, they did inform the Department that we were providing "Education of a rather good quality". This has been acknowledged in writing by the Minister for Schools and several senior civil servants within the DfES.
* You would not meet with us or advise us about hours of operation or what constitutes part-time education.
* In May 2005 you officially threatened to prosecute us(with the possibility of six months imprisonment) if we failed to register. Following a cut in our hours of tuition you withdrew this threat.
* Then your officials gained ministerial permission to redefine the term "full-time" education simply in order to embrace us within your fold.


The Damage done to Tyndale by the DfES's protracted enquiries over three years
Your actions have led to substantial costs to us. We have lost over half of our children because of your Department's bullying tactics and the uncertainty created by your protracted enquiries.
We have had to employ the services of a senior barrister to examine the legal position of the Department and the consultation exercise regarding redefining "full time education" for independent schools.

You have involved your own legal team in much work. At least three ministers and the Permanent Parliamentary Secretary (David Bell) has had to become involved in our case. We have had to prepare and submit complaints (ongoing) to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman and the Information Commissioner's Office and OFSTED in order to maintain our right to teach children according to the dictates of conscience and the will of their parents.
We now find that your officials are being dilatory and obstructive in releasing to us further information under both the data Protection Act and the Freedom of Information Act.


Why we wish to remain an "education otherwise than at school" provision
You will know that we do not have the bullying, swearing and general bad behaviour that so blights the educational experience of so many in schools in our borough. HMI acknowledged that they observed were good relationships between our two teachers and the children. You know that our parents have the staff's phone numbers and are in more or less daily contact with them. You know that we advertise openly in the local paper, on the internet and in the Yellow Pages. We have had several visits from community leaders including a cabinet minister since we opened. There is nothing about our operations that should have led you to show the degree of suspicion which has been evident. It is evident to you that we want to offer as substantial a provision as is possible within the rules determined by Parliament.


We ask you even at this late stage to:
a) acknowledge that there is nothing at all unclear about the definition of full-time education as set out in your own Documents.
b) acknowledge that the will of parliament has consistently been that institutions meeting the other criteria and providing "full-time" education should be regarded as schools, and that parliament has never wished to embrace "major providers" in this definition.
c) withdraw from this present consultation which is aimed simply at forcing us to register or close.
d) acknowledge that the children's best interests are served by getting the Local Authority to carry out its legal obligations by "inspecting" them on an individual basis (something our LA has signally failed to do for three years)
e) recognise that in the case of small providers such as ourselves, parents are best placed and motivated to scrutinise and secure the well being and educational attainment of their children.

Yours sincerely



Ferris Lindsay
(Principal Tutor)