Go to navigation
It is currently Tue Dec 06, 2016 12:13 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 14 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 7:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2014 8:38 pm
Posts: 59
Grammar open days they have confirmed that tbe lower pass marks WILL apply for free school meals children in 2015??? I thought they couldn't apply it this year?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 5:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2011 10:31 am
Posts: 71
Don't believe everything Gideon tells you. Other schools in other areas have done this, so no reason why KE schools can't, I would have thought.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 6:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2013 7:59 pm
Posts: 160
The Office of the Schools Adjudicator ruled that the King Edward VI Foundation – did not have the “necessary permission” to impose the change for the 2015 academic year, not sure if this has now changed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 6:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2014 8:38 pm
Posts: 59
I phoned the office of Schools Adjudicator today and they said that nothing has changed. But headmistress of Handsworth said confidently last night that it would be sorted by August and that they would be taking 32 children on FSM on a lower score this year. I think it's a bit harsh on parents as we dont really know where we stand. I'm torn as in principle I agree with the FSM thing, but I have a very borderline little girl sitting this year and would like as many places as possible to be available to her.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 7:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 1:54 pm
Posts: 154
I suspect they are circumventing the rules. My guess is there may be ONE low qualifying score, set artificially low. NOT two official scores.

Eg Set QS = 200. (not an automatic qualifying score).

Take 32 PP who score 200+ may be in the range 200-210
Then take the rest by rank, Eg 270-220.

This goes around the issue.

Then the objection will be this was not consulted as previously children were ranked and taken on the basis of score. This is a new system - setting a qualifying score and not an AUTOMATIC qualifying score.

Then the well off will retaliate and claim Pupil premium by working via limited companies and taking a minimum salary until they qualify for PP. The scheme is well advertised and I believe lawful.

Of course, don't believe everything I say.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 8:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2014 8:38 pm
Posts: 59
Gideon, they may try this but surely this is still discriminatory and against the funding agreements with the local authority?? I don't know why they have to mess with it after the decision of the adjudicator as we are currently preparing for an exam and don't even know how many places will be available to her. Doesn't seem very fair at this stage with 8 weeks to go!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 9:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2011 10:31 am
Posts: 71
gideon wrote:
Then the well off will retaliate and claim Pupil premium by working via limited companies and taking a minimum salary until they qualify for PP. The scheme is well advertised and I believe lawful.



I can't think of a single person I know who could do their existing well-paid job via a limited company, even if they could be bothered to set one up.

Also, not everything that is "lawful" is the right thing to do, and amazingly some people care about that. They might even be pleased that King Edward's is doing something to improve social mobility - isn't that what grammar schools are all about?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 9:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 1:54 pm
Posts: 154
Edited by moderator



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 6:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 5:12 pm
Posts: 1300
Location: Birmingham
Quote:
Then the well off will retaliate and claim Pupil premium by working via limited companies and taking a minimum salary until they qualify for PP. The scheme is well advertised and I believe lawful.


Not sure I follow this. I had my own limited company for many years and only paid myself the a salary based on the Lower Earning Limit(LEL - less than the minimum wage) to avoid paying employers and employees NI. All perfectly legal. However I'm sure I would not be eligible for PP or any sort of state benefits due to the sizable dividends I was drawing. I can't think of any contractor who would deliberately refuse to take dividends from their company and put themselves in self inflicted poverty just to claim PP.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 6:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 1:54 pm
Posts: 154
Every time I explain the scheme a moderator is removing it. Shall I send you a PM?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 14 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: veryhopeful and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
CALL 020 8204 5060
   
Privacy Policy | Refund Policy | Disclaimer | Copyright © 2004 – 2016