Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Holy Trinity Church of England Primary School, Cuckfield

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. B music ian 06:12, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Holy Trinity Church of England Primary School, Cuckfield[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Small, unremarkable primary school. It claims the school dates from 15 - but that is a school of a different name in a different building elsewhere in the village. Bob Re-born (talk) 21:49, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 22:19, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 22:19, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

merge to Cuckfield#Education - as per nom this is a new school, with a new name, on a different site to the original. Sure, there has been a school in Cuckfield since the stone age or whatever, but it is not the same school as is there now. What is notable is that the village has had a village school for hundreds of years, and that notability should be acknowledged in the village article. Fmph (talk) 02:01, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The name was changed to maintain links with the village church with which the school originally shared a site. All local historians,including the local museum, consider this to be the same school. The school even has the list of headteacher's plaque dating from 1512 and running to the current date hanging in its entrance hall. The diocese of Chichester consider it to be the same school which is why they are holding a special service in June this year to mark the school's 500th anniversary.smcculley (talk) 13:57, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: A quick check strongly suggests that the Cuckfield School founded in the 16th century is notable and I disagree with the nominator's claim that this must be a different school because it is in different premises and now has a different name. All that can be reasonably required is verifiable substantial institutional continuity between the Cuckfield School of the historical sources and Holy Trinity Primary School - which would be the case if most of the teachers and pupils were the same immediately before and immediately after a change of name, premises or official type of school. However, all the evidence for continuity we have at the moment is unbacked assertions on the school website and mention of unnamed local historians - we really need something more reliable. PWilkinson (talk) 22:10, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I think you have got that almost completely wrong. In England, should a school change it's name, it is almost impossible that it is the same school as previously. Changing a school's name is one of the most difficult things to achieve legally. It requires a unanimous vote of the school's governing bodyGttL - Ch 3 Sect 64, and is the only matter for which proxy votes are allowed under school governing body voting rules. It almost never happens. When you find school's which have apparently changed name, what will usually have happened is that the original school will have completely and legally closed (a much easier legal step) and a brand new school will have opened, with a new governing body, possibly a new sponsor (perhaps a church or trust), where all the staff will have had to re-apply for their own jobs. Sometimes you also see an change of age-range - Junior -> Primary perhaps. Inevitably, it will have most of the same children, if it continues to serve the same community. But it will be an entirely different school.

And if the new entity has acquired a sponsor, foundation or trust, the new name will often reflect that - in this case the "Church of England" explains that. But often it may just be the use of the word(s) 'voluntary', 'aided' and/or 'controlled', or the term VA or VC, in the name. That will indicate this. Significantly, I can't find any mention of any of these terms in relation to the original Cuckfield School. This is now a voluntary aided school, where the CoE is the sponsor. That means that the church will appoint a majority of the school's governors. If the predecessor was a bog-standard community or county school, then it's GB would largely have been elected by parents or appointed by the local authority, and no individual stakeholder group would have had a clear majority.

That would be a very significant change, which taken together with the location and name change would mean that this is an entirely different entity to its predecessor. Fmph (talk) 13:19, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, B music ian 14:49, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- I have no particualr knowledge of this school, but Fmph is wrong about the immutability of schools. The article lamentably short on the history of the school and how it came to become a C of E aided school. There were procedures in the 19th century for independent schools to opt in to becoming schools subject to the education authority. the fact that the school moved to a new building in 1990 is neither here nor there - if the whole school staff and pupils (other than pupils who had just left) relocated to a new building it is clearly the same school, probably with the same governors. I normally recommend that primary schools should be merged with the place where they are. I am not suggesting that here, as there is clearly a lot to be added about the history. One should not assume that, because a change is difficult to make today, that it has always been difficult. If there is a consensus, the education authority or the Secretary of State would, I am sure, be able to amke the changes. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:22, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since writign the above, I have added a "history" section to the article, which explains how a school founded as a grammar school ends off as a Church of England voluntary aided school. This may be an unexpected course of events, but is appears to be true, according to WP:RS, which I have cited. If the outcome is not to "keep", the article must be merged with Cuckfield where it is; deletion should be out of the question. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:54, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Changing school names isn't that big a deal - the closing/reopening thing is mostly when special measures have failed to lift a failing school sufficiently, and a change of staff and image is the last resort, or when two schools are being 'merged' by being closed and a new site used for the new named school - which won't have continuity of staff or premises. In this case, as I see it, the old site had to be given up, and a name change was decided on at the same time. Unless there is evidence to the contrary, I would take it that the head and staff all moved with the kids to the new site. It's not that hard for all the governors of a school to agree on something. From my experience, quite a few governors are rubber stamps for the Chair anyway... Peridon (talk) 19:47, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BTW I'm not sure what is meant above by Junior to Primary being a change of age range. Primary is the umbrella term for Juniors and Infants, which in many cases are together in one school. It used to be the case that Juniors and Infants - Junior Boys, Junior Girls, and Mixed Infants even - were separate schools with different heads on one site, but that is rare now - and the boys and girls segregation on a single site is history in primary education, so far as I am aware. It may be different in a different part of the country. Peridon (talk) 19:56, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I think the age and history of the school make it notable. And I agree it is still the same school, even though it has moved to a new building and changed its name. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:46, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Obviously notable - see here and here, for example. Warden (talk) 21:48, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. There are multiple reliable sources to establish the notability of this school and to write an encyclopaedic article in line with WP:N. I'm not clear on the present composition of the building but the original grammar school building and the 19th-century addition are listed buildings. See this entry on the Images of England website. The Victoria County History provides further background information. See here. There is also much useful information to develop the article in this council report on the history of Cuckfield. Dahliarose (talk) 10:23, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - based on 500 years of history. Bearian (talk) 17:00, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify a point above a Church of England aided school only nominates two members of the Governing body and exercises no control over the school. Other than an inspection of Christian ethos every five years or so the church exercises no significant influence over a school it aids. Holy Trinity Church in cuckfield always had a strong influence over the old school - in fact the orginal school is in the church grounds about twenty feet away from the church front door. As stated in the article when the school moved - taking its governing body, headteacher and the majority of staff and pupils with it - the name was changed to maintain that link with the church.User:smcculley (talk)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.