Go to navigation
It is currently Fri Dec 09, 2016 5:52 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Sep 19, 2014 7:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 5:26 pm
Posts: 7063
OSA decision on Dr. Challoner's
19th September 2014


viewtopic.php?f=35&p=463431#p463431

_________________
Etienne


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2014 3:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 4:23 pm
Posts: 5
The Adjudicator has completely dismissed every point made by "Gideon" in his objection to the OSA. I would say that it was 'game, set and match' to Dr Challoner's.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2014 4:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 1:21 pm
Posts: 11952
I think we all had our money on Dr Fenton :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2014 4:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 10:59 am
Posts: 3579
Oh don't, the person who posts on here who is seemingly also the objector is claiming victory on the fsm and distance tiebreaker technicalities that have been raised and had to be confirmed as incorrect.
Shallow I know, but slightly annoying for the school none the less, I suspect the tie break has been added Now, and I would be shocked if anyone objected in the area to any fsm child admitted in 2015 as priority above their own child who may live closer, but you never know?

A lady from another area entirely, has been fined and given 100 hours community service for falsifying documents that showed proof of address of her child in order to get them admitted to a good school.
The offer was sent to the owner of the property and they sent it back to admissions, with not known at this address written on it....or some such. An ill thought out plan, she was obviously desperate to achieve the best for her child, but unlike some could not afford to buy or rent a second property near her desired school.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2014 5:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 9:56 pm
Posts: 8228
Do you think the community service will be teaching citizenship?

I really don't know the ins and outs of this Dr Challoner's thing but it is still good that processes like that exist. It's not a lot different from people objecting to planning developments etc on grounds of this, that and the other. Their objections are not always valid - and sometimes they are valid and are ignored - but the public process needs to be there.

Fashions in admissions policy change according to the Admissions Code. Some of the things in the Admissions Code grate with different people at different times. We all have differing views.

"Local schools for local children" I find a quite annoying phrase, or differing disguised shades of it are quite irritating particularly when it comes along with the false message that schools within a county boundary are "our schools" or "funded by us" - neither statement is true.

I haven't read Dr Fenton's new admission policy but if one has to reside there by an earlier date than for other schools to qualify for a place I see a logical flaw in it that notion which I would think be worth objecting to. At a different time a different objector could probably get a different response from the School Adjudicator - all these things are matters of opinion at the end of the day. It's the beauty of English law - so very grey.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 24, 2014 5:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 4:25 pm
Posts: 2610
State schools were built to provide an education for all children. Each locality has it's primaries and secondaries. The state can't afford to, not should it, have to fund children being transported around the countryside. Therefore where possible all children should be able to attend their nearest school. The phrase 'local schools for local children' shouldn't even exist, it shouldn't need to!

There has always been a two teared system in existence, the second tear being private education. Strictly speaking for those who are unhappy with the school choice they are given and are fortunate enough to have the funds available then this is the answer.

Unfortunately since the abolition of many Grammar schools, a policy brought in to eradicate a two teared education, and the introduction of league tables there is a two teared system creeping back into state education. Whereas the old system was designed to give academically able children an education specific to their needs this new system is far more devisive. Personally I find it appalling that people feel their own DC has a right to go to the best school wherever that maybe at the expense of another DC, we are not talking about simply avoiding poor schools here which I do understand and is a seperate problem.

The state system is being manipulated by savvy parents and that is not what it was designed for. Whilst I believe Dr Challoners has gone too far in its insistence on residency from the April preceeding the actual sitting of the test I do believe that people should be living in some sort of catchment area for any state school that their DC attends. We live in a mobile society and people need to be allowed to move freely be it for work, social or purely pleasurable reasons. Therefore schools must allow for this, however they shouldn't be catering for the whims of any DP wherever they may live in the country.

Personally in regards to the Transfer test or any Grammer school test for any state school in this country I believe DC should have to be living in the vicinity of the school in order to sit the test. It is a huge waste of public funding for schools to be catering for the massive amount of sitters that they are and as state schools they are forgetting their purpose. To provide an education for those children who live in their locality, not to be top of a league table.

If a family moves into an area after the testing date then they sit the test at a later date simple as that.

In regards to challenging admission codes I totally agree Mystery that there has to be a process in place to do so. Unfortuantely the very DPs who should be challenging some of them, i.e DPs living close to schools like Pates, that have multiple entrants from not just its area or in fact this country but other countries as well, accept the status quo and their DC suffer because of it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 24, 2014 6:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 9:56 pm
Posts: 8228
The admissions policy of a superselective in kent was once challenged by kcc n the basis of it should be providing "local schools for local children". They didn't get anywhere. So adjudicators must each differ in their personal views.

I don't quite follow all your arguments. If authorities only paid the statutory minimum require for school transport the notion of school choice would not significantly affect the amount paid for public transport.

In reality, it is very hard to reconcile the slogan "local schools for local children" with the concept of choice. As a parent, I would settle for the lesser of the two evils - choice, and put up with the fact that this means that one might be a bit less likely to get into a fairly close school. Parents who apply to challoners all have choice if their child has passed - this grammar or a high school. Everyone who roots for grammars is, by default, supporting some kind of choice which does not entirely depend on distance.

By having grammars at all one is increasing the average transport distance for every child in the grammar area.

Do I read the challoners admission policy correctly? Does one have to have been living in the area from 1 April of year 5, the calendar year preceding admission? And have sold the previous house? Or from 1 April of year 6, the school year preceding admission?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 24, 2014 6:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 9:56 pm
Posts: 8228
southbucks3 wrote:
Oh don't, the person who posts on here who is seemingly also the objector is claiming victory on the fsm and distance tiebreaker technicalities that have been raised and had to be confirmed as incorrect.
Shallow I know, but slightly annoying for the school none the less, I suspect the tie break has been added Now, and I would be shocked if anyone objected in the area to any fsm child admitted in 2015 as priority above their own child who may live closer, but you never know?

A lady from another area entirely, has been fined and given 100 hours community service for falsifying documents that showed proof of address of her child in order to get them admitted to a good school.
The offer was sent to the owner of the property and they sent it back to admissions, with not known at this address written on it....or some such. An ill thought out plan, she was obviously desperate to achieve the best for her child, but unlike some could not afford to buy or rent a second property near her desired school.


The dishonest woman was not short of money I don't think. A good job title is mentioned somewhere. Sometimes I really cannot fathom what you all find is / is not acceptable in terms of people wishing to move for a school. The localism lobby want people to go to their local school, but it has to be just the right school, a new school that moves in spoils things, and you are happy for people to move for a school so long as they are not moving for the school and all the sales and completions happen a long time before the test? At which point parents might not know if their child stands a chance or not. It is mighty confusing! And choice is less important than distance but grammars are ok?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 24, 2014 7:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 10:59 am
Posts: 5922
mystery wrote:
As a parent, I would settle for the lesser of the two evils - choice, and put up with the fact that this means that one might be a bit less likely to get into a fairly close school.
Parental choice is actually one of the biggest 'evils' in modern education and is recognised now internationally as a very effective tool by which middle class parents maintain and in fact increase their class advantage as they are the only ones with the means to exercise that choice in their favour. Along with the creation of academies and free schools, it is another important step in the marketisation of education, with parents as consumers who determine the success or failure of the business (school) in the marketplace. The ultimate effect of this is to ensure that poorer children remain in the 'worst' schools while middle class ones populate and benefit from the best ones, which then continue to improve (in terms of the measurements which are used to rank them) and therefore attract ever more desirable clients.

Is that what we really want to 'choose'?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 24, 2014 9:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 4:25 pm
Posts: 2610
Exactly Amber.

Mystery when the Grammar school system was fully set up there were usually two or three secondary schools in any one town, village children expected to travel the nearest town. DC would then sit a test and be allocated the appropriate school for their ability. They didn't choose to go to a Grammar school, it was the school they were allocated. Transport funding was then based on how far from your allocated school you lived. In my Grammar school most of the DD came from 'working class' homes and many of the DDs would have been entitled to free school meals. It was not a middle class enclave, most of the ones I am still in contact with are still politically socialist.

It was not an exact science just as now. Some children were allocated Grammar who found it too academic, it happens even for the untutored as most were then, some were allocated secondary modern when they could easily cope with Grammar. They often had the opportunity to move at a later date, some chose to stay in their secondary moderns. Parents also appealed but I believe it was rarer then and possibly less transparent than today. (no idea if stats exist but my parents went through this process). Some parents opted to go private if their children weren't allocated a Grammar, most didn't in my area as those that wanted private education didn't tend to sit the test anyway.

So if you live in a selective county you wouldn't be making a choice but sending your DC to the school that the county has deemed suitable for their academic ability. That is why I personally disagree with Bucks's current transport policy that will only pay costs to the nearest school. It makes a mockery of the whole idea behind selective schools.

I have no problem with people moving if they are unhappy with their local school but I do have a problem with people hedging their bets and by doing so taking opportunities away from other DC especially when it's DC who won't have the parental support that makes the difference when faced with a poorly performing school.

p.s realise I have spelled tier wrong previously and really can't be asked to go back editing, no wonder my DC have dyslexia :roll:


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 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