“I was unfortunate enough to have attended this school in the early 90s. On the face of it, at the time they use to advertise it as a 'good school'. However, the reality for me was that the 5 years I spent at this school I would describe as the worst 5 years of my life in all contexts; in terms of education and the bullying. I can not imagine much worse than what I experienced there. People should realise that facts are not always as they appear.

Has it ever struck anyone as strange the amount of pupils that come in from Bristol? yet, they are unable to fill places with pupils in their own locality. The likely reason is that there are more single sex schools in Bath, and Oldfield is the closest one to people in Bristol, and it is on a direct bus route for much of their Bristol intake.”

“Could somebody please explain to me the system by which a local authority (BANES) is responsible for running a school (Oldfield) where the vast majority of pupils apparently do not live in that authority? At first sight it seems a great oddity.
And could somebody also explain how it is the case that the same school (Oldfield) is considered outstanding and yet the great majority of Bath parents wanting their daughters to go to a girls' school opt for Hayesfield School.
Am I missing something here?”

“It is incredible that an outstanding school such as Oldfield should be at threat of closure. Who would believe it ? A successful formula so it is to be dismantled.It isn't as though the South West is full of outstanding state schools! Where is this so called choice we all hear about? Where is the right of the child to the very best education? It is incredible that one of the main drivers is that a high proportion of Oldfield children travel from Bristol. Are these children of no importance? Don't they bring funding with them ? I have always been against schools separating from local authority control but with such absurd decision making I would aplaud it. Go for it Oldfield!”

“I was at the meeting at St Marks on Wednesday and the message came over clearly that the school is a valued community asset in addition to being a school held in high regard by the parents of those attending.
St Marks has for a long time been a victim of Primary School gate gossip telling tales of what is supposed to go on at the school that have little bearing on the facts. This is the main reason why the intake remains low and many children travel across town to Beechen Cliff, Ralph Allen etc,
I have a son currently at St Marks and a daughter who did attend Oldfield. My son is very happy at St Marks, far more so than my daughter was at Oldfield. There is a genuine feeling of togetherness and a strong spirit at St Marks. The recent good OFSTED report bears this out.
It was also said at the meeting that only 27 B&NES parents had put Oldfield down as first choice for the 2010 intake. The rest of the places will be taken up by pupils from outside B&NES whose parents see it as preferable to the unpopular Bristol schools.
It may be the case that B&NES receives financial recogonition for these pupils but my understanding is that this does not go near meeting their full proportion of the costs of running the school.
The decision of Oldfield to try and opt out was not unexpected but with something over 70% of non B&NES pupils there the fact is it has not been popular in recent years with local (B&NES) parents.
I hope that a school is retained on the St Marks site to serve the north east corner of the city and it continues to build on the current school ethos.”

“What a bureaucratic **ck-up this whole thing is! I was in the crowd of over three hundred that turned out for the first of the so called 'consultation' discussions. The arch-deacon couldn't be bothered to turn up as he had a much more important pre arranged meeting to attend, but sent his prayers and a wishy washy short statement via his local non entity. So the future of hundreds of our children seems not too important to God then?

We were then treated to a whole series of demographic statistics based purely upon population realignment and projected birth trends. No consideration appeared to influence the projected thoughts of our council representatives as to the drastic detrimental affects upon the community. I can't speak for Oldfield, but the closure of St Marks would certainly remove a very important focal point for Larkhall. More important I would suggest than your church arch deacon.

As for Councillor Watts vehement denial to my suggestion that perhaps B&NES and the diocese were more interested in the residential land value of the Larkhall site than in education, I would point out that he did not respond with complete truth. You and your council DO own quite a large tract of St Marks playing field councillor. So we shall watch that with interest, won't we?

We were also told that some 25% of the residents of Bath want to retain the two central single sex schools, and it has been decided to bow to their wishes. So the remaining 75% of views remain irrelevant. That doesn't seem too democratic to me.

The most important factor is the future of our youngsters, and you B&NES council have been prevaricating for far too long, providing a very uncertain future for two first class schools, their staffs, and parents. With a little lateral and innovative thinking, both establishments could have a long term future. I'm not sure those involved in making this decision are capable of that.”

“As things stand I'm not intending sending my boys to Oldfield (certainly not while its a girls only school), however I do think the proposal to potentially close either of Oldfield or St Marks is flawed. If this proposal goes ahead we will end up with one school in the North of Bath, and 5 south of the river. This has to be a recipe for increased traffic chaos as parents drive their kids to school (bear in mind the existing North/South buses to Ralph Allen are already stuffed beyond capacity with First refusing to provide more).

If the theory behind closing various schools and re-opening them on the same site (e.g. one of Oldfield/st Marks and Culverhay) is that you can then ensure you get the best teachers etc, then surely the answer is to close all 3 plus Ralph Allen, and leave Ralph Allen shut - its out on a limb, difficult to provide public transport to, and not close to any significant residential areas.

If excellence doesn't make Oldfield immune from closure why is Ralph Allen immune? As things stand if Academy status is the only way to undermine this daft reorganisation then so be it.”

“The creation of a faith school by closing Oldfield and St Marks discriminates against all those students outside the faith. The numbers of students at St Marks suggests that there is not a striong demand anyway. By closing Oldfield, the designation of three specialisms won through the hard work and dedication of the staff will be lost, as they cannot be carried across to the new school. The specialisms bring with them substantial additional funding, which would also be lost.

As a former chair of governors at Oldfield, and father of one of its students, I am fully aware of the excellent standards set by the school and cannot fathom the madness of the idea of closing it. The formation of an academy will be a triumph of common sense over political blundering.”

“Legislation this month, academy status by September this year. That¿s the Tory plan.

I personally have major misgivings about taking schools out of local authority control as it pretty much destroys any hope of communities planning a coherent schools system. However I do think BANES have brought this on themselves by targeting a truly outstanding school for closure. Barking!

Good luck Oldfield, you deserve your success!”