Local schools for local children?

[Sennockianmum]

I moved to Kent 10 years ago. I grew up in Sussex and had no idea of the drama that grammar schools create. However from my own comprehensive background I am very much of the view that school places should go to local students. I simply do not get the idea that a child from London can swoop in and take a place from a local child? Given the government relies on local authority schools to provide places how can grammars still justify this? From my understanding in West Kent it is just Skinners that still does this but what is the justification?

[FortyNinePence]

I guess the justification if you can call it that is that in these days of league tables etc all schools are chasing the top achievers.

I find the saddest example Dartford boys, which used to make a difference to local boys but now has given over half of its intake to out of area children. Judd did the right thing last year with its intake, a shame there aren't more grammars taking that stance.

[PettswoodFiona]

It does work both ways, Kent children, especially near the border attend Bromley and Bexley schools. 8% of the St Olaves intake were from Kent looking at this data http://cds.bromley.gov.uk/documents/s50 ... 20Plan.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And less than half were from the Borough of Bromley. For some (but clearly not all) comprehensives it is the same, Chislehurst school for girls has less than 50% from the Borough of Bromley. Weald goes on distance and has a priority area and so in theory Kent people have priority but the distance just so happens to go out a long way as it is about number of places and demand, no place was taken away from someone nearer the school. It is emotive and some admissions policies seem unfair especially when children end up traipsing for miles to go to a different school and cross paths with children doing the same but in the opposite direction. One thing I learned about all the school visits is that not every school will suit every child so whilst choice creates its own problems, lack of choice creates even more.

[Sennockianmum]

That sounds terrible at Dartford boys. A community school should provide places for local children - end of really for me. You apply to your local school and that's it - when I looked around Skinners there was a family who had come from Guildford, and were going to move if their child got it. Talk about cherry picking. Never mind the local child that might miss out in a place. It feels wrong.

[MullerMan]

What tosh. So your moving 10 years ago makes it ok versus someone moving from Guildford or anywhere else now ? And if they moved 6 months ago, does that then make it OK as they are suddenly 'local' ? Did you not take a place from a local child in primary school when you moved into the area ? We all pay the same taxes and so why shouldn't education be mobile ? Kent kids go to Bromley, Bexley, Surrey and vice vera. Isn't it good to have a social mix with kids from different places and backgrounds bringing their own experiences into the classroom ? Presume you have the view that war refugees should not come into your area because they may be taking housing and schooling from a local ? Maybe you should build a wall !!

[lefol]

Sennockianmum, this issue clearly bothers you but you cannot blame the parents. I note you made the same comment in response to a question I posted on another thread but I chose to ignore it. As Pettswoodfiona and others indicated, most schools are on the border of Bexley/Kent and as such you will have children from both boroughs applying for schools local to them. It is all a matter of choice for parents and children as to which schools are listed on the CAF. The super selective will always take students based on scores and it helps their GCSE grades as they only select the best- Olaves, Judd and Skinners for example. A child could score 320 and live close and still not get in. Your blame should lie with the government for the limited choice available to parents and not the parents .

[Sennockianmum]

My point was about local children missing out due to grammars selecting on score, not distance. To assume I don't want war refugees here is ridiculous. Before Judd instigated the catchment I heard stories of Sevenoaks boys being allocated grammar places in Folkestone, whereas boys in London with 1 point more could get a place ahead of them. And yes my issue is with the system. My point about moving here 10 years ago was not that I am 'more local' than someone who moved six months ago, but more that I didn't grow up in a grammar county so had no idea it would be like this. And as it happens I privately educate my boys, so no local primary place was taken...

[kenyancowgirl]

...And some people have issues with families who privately educate children at primary, to garner as many "advantages" as they can, before "taking" a place at a state grammar school for secondary, from a child whose parents have no other option than state school...(GS of course having been set up initially to educate the bright, but poor, of Britain...)

One cannot pick and choose the advantages that suit ones child, is my point.

[FortyNinePence]

I don't blame any parents for taking advantage of the system, I think it's the school admission policies that are at fault (or on a wider level, how schools are measured and financed, but that's a whole other can of worms).

In my opinion, Judd has got it right, and Dartford boys has got it wrong. The fact remains that the further away you are from the borders, the more chance you have of attending a proper comprehensive school, as opposed to a secondary modern. And of course, there is a difference, to suggest otherwise would be disingenuous.

[loopylala]

I don't blame any parents for taking advantage of the system,

I do blame the parents who have their children travelling an hour and half or more each way to a school they have never set foot in because it has Grammar in the title and the GCSE results are 1% or 2% higher than their nearest school.

Every year there appears to be an increasing number of parents posting their childs score(s) asking if there is any selective school their child can get a place at (which doesn't exactly suggest they are looking for a school that best fits their child). The extent to which parents are to blame is further highlighted by the number of parents who post to ask how their child can get to X,Y,Z Grammar after their child has sat the exam, the CAF has been submitted or allocations have been made.

I also blame the parents who feel that rules don't apply to them, it is quite right that they can use a postcode for the minimum qualifying period to gain access to a school only for them to move out of the area once they are in the clear.

Let's not forget the parents who try to wait until results are out before moving house (often to find out that they have missed the deadline for moving so are unlikely to gain a place anyway). They don't do this because their local schools are sink schools. It is quite evident that they do this because their local schools are quite acceptable options if their child doesn't gain a Grammar place.

However, I do agree that much of the problem also stems from:

the school admission policies that are at fault (or on a wider level, how schools are measured and financed, but that's a whole other can of worms).