Go to navigation
It is currently Sat Dec 03, 2016 6:53 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jun 13, 2011 10:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 2:01 pm
Posts: 6683
Location: Herts
So what do we all think about this? Y6 siblings of Y13 students being able to get a sibling place and children of staff at the school returning as a separate category for entry. The impact of this on DAO will be to reduce the amount of distance places available which last year was 28. With more siblings and staff children this number would reduce. DG


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 13, 2011 10:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 4:12 pm
Posts: 302
The sibling rule makes life easier for parents to do pick ups so I can see why the rules should be extended to staff but to apply it for Year 13???
Putting aside that as one sibling joins Year 7 the other will be graduating, how many Year 13s are picked up by parents?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 13, 2011 11:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:02 pm
Posts: 662
Location: Herts
I don't have a problem with the split-sibling rule. Why should a family be penalised for having a large age gap between their children? In reality, this would probably apply to relatively few families anyway.

But the "children of staff" category irritates me. When this was in place a while back, people would joke that our local selective schools had the highest qualified dinner ladies around. I am sure it must be convenient for the staff to only have one journey in the morning, but so what? They might as well give priority to students whose parents work locally :lol:

On a more serious note, and as these allocations would come from distance places, I think this is additional selection by the back door.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 13, 2011 6:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 11:39 pm
Posts: 2080
I was rather hoping my son could get me a teaching job at his school. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 13, 2011 9:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2010 12:10 pm
Posts: 225
My understanding of new code was that these extra places would have to be over and above the existing pan. Code talks a lot about over subscribed schools being able to expand. This was the impression I got when I read about proposals in one of last weeks broad sheets. Did anybody else read this?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 9:55 pm
Posts: 327
Location: Herts
tense wrote:
But the "children of staff" category irritates me. When this was in place a while back, people would joke that our local selective schools had the highest qualified dinner ladies around.


:lol:

I wonder how fierce the competition would be to get that coveted dinner lady post - and how much rotation of staff will increase! I guess there's almost half a year between school application and allocation, would they accept "late applications"?

When do we get the "job board" going? How much do you think people would pay to get the place, I mean the job?

Now I really know of staff that joined our School's after school club so that they could keep a close eye on the waiting list (before the in-year admissions started being managed centrally). And this was also in the absence of formal "children of staff" preferences.

But I am looking forward to when relatives of nurses jumping waiting lists. With so many schools becoming foundations, I guess that anyone can start bidding for those cleaning contracts to get given staff places...

Sorry, but this does not wash.

And I am surprised the DAO head is not concerned about this - he spends so much effort telling potential parents who the school would not be good for....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 9:55 pm
Posts: 327
Location: Herts
decaff wrote:
My understanding of new code was that these extra places would have to be over and above the existing pan.


Would this mean that the schools would become more or less crowded depending on the staff changes? Prossibly not very practical?

I's guess it would instead be at the cost of whatever is the last criterium that gets allocations. Often this is the distance criterium. So localism would be set back.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 4:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 9:55 pm
Posts: 327
Location: Herts
Daogroupie wrote:
The impact of this on DAO will be to reduce the amount of distance places available which last year was 28. With more siblings and staff children this number would reduce. DG


DG, I am hoping that the "children of staff" criterium would be placed after the academic and music selection criteria? :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 1:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 9:55 pm
Posts: 327
Location: Herts
Potentially the objective of attracting and motivating teachers to work in the schools where their children are could be achieved by doing it the other way around. But probably that would not fit in well with standard recruitment practice. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 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