Local schools for local children?

[klmh1968]

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.

I actually disagree with that point. Judd's entrance criteria is not fair regarding local children. They have children from Bexley and Maidstone in the catchment area purely because they live on the train line. Children that live nearer and not on the train line, although may have a decent bus route, etc are not. That is not fair in my eyes. I actually voiced my dissatisfaction to the governors regarding this point.

[klmh1968]

Most state schools are not allowed to encourage the 11+ at all.

Private school candidates have the benefit of having been prepared for private secondary - usually this involves NVR/VR/Numeracy test practice as this is part of most private secondary entrance exams. Often we hear that parents didn't have anything to do with their child getting into secondary because the school did it all for them. Plus all the other factors that parents want from private schools that DO give an advantage over state primary to 11+ candidates- usually more teacher/pupil time due to small ratios, generally a perceived "better" behaviour, often more exposure to science and better facilities/libraries etc that help with the literacy side. And, more often than not, after school clubs or weeks practising for various entrance exams, state 11+ or no - if they are preparing your child for 11+ entry in a private school, they are being helped above and beyond the bog standard state primary would help.

Most prep schools for boys prepare for 13 plus entry via CE - there is no preparation or encouragement for 11 plus entry.

All the prep schools in my area prepare for the 11+ - they tend to be very proud of their pass rates!

[klmh1968]

If anyone is unsure of my view, here it is. All Grammar schools should be open door. No local catchment preference and kids get in on ability (score). No preference for distance at all. The low-income-family kid living 5 miles away should get in ahead of the local kid, if he/she scores higher. Rich, poor, whatever, if you are clever enough you should be able to have access to the school of your choice. Simple.

Why though? It's crazy and expensive [to pocket and environment] to transport children miles.

In Bucks we have a flat 'qualification' score and distance allocation to schools - it seems to work well with Bucks schools outperforming those in Kent. Why should we change?

This is precisely what I would like to see in Kent. If you pass you apply to your local grammar.

Why should you have to go to the local grammar? I want my DC to go to the school that is most suitable for them and not simply the nearest. Children that go to the local comp in my area actually leave earlier than my DC who catch the bus to their GS. Before anyone jumps down my throat about OCC - I live in Kent although the train station is in East Sussex.

[klmh1968]

Another solution which would arguably be far fairer would be to abolish all the GS in Kent and go to a comprehensive system.

Of course then you would get parents using income to buy houses in the catchment of the "more" suitable comprehensives, rather than paying for private schools (which, incidentally, amount to pretty much the same thing - using money to gain educational advantage).

The lottery system for allocation has some merits - although not particularly for the local schools for local kids argument. Fundamentally, as all counties do not have GS's, those that do have to allow for some children outside their immediate area to have a go, (I think it is called the Greenwich Agreement?)

No system is completely fair - you do appear as if you want to pick and choose the bits that make it infinitely "fairer" for your child above all others, and that is where this becomes incredibly emotive - especially when you freely admit that you have paid for prep school. OP, whilst probably feeling that this is all aimed at you, it is actually a general shot - it would do people well to remember that some folk do not have "paid education" as an option - at all - and when faced with a system set up to help bright but poorer children, it is very difficult to be enthusiastically supportive of any scheme that gives another leg up to those already on a couple of steps up.

I would very much like Kent to move to a comprehensive system, I think a piecemeal grammar system that we have simply doesn't work. I am not sure what bits I want to pick and choose? The prep my boys goes to was chosen to provide the single sex option plus at the time, we thought they would be headed to Tonbridge; their prep is an active feeder for it and only really encourages applications to that sort of school, there is certainly no 11 plus advantage, particularly when you look at the results that primaries such as Amherst, the local 11 plus factory, produces. You could argue our money would have been better spent buying a house in catchment to that but when we made the decision on schooling years ago we didn't know that a change in circumstances might mean that independent schooling wasn't an option going forward. I am not sure how making distance the main criteria for entry gives another leg up to those 'already on a couple of steps up'. That assumes all children living nearby are somehow advantaged. It simply means schools places, which the county council includes in its entire county wide capacity, are accessible to children who the county council are supposed to be responsible for educating. It appears all very one way into Kent, as Kent children (outside of the London part of Kent) don't have the reciprocal chance to apply to a school in another county as they simply live too far away.

So you would like Kent to move to a comprehensive system, yet you chose to privately educate your DC. Unfortunately not all parents are able to afford that option so if our DC are bright enough we chose to apply to grammar schools - at least that way we have a choice. East Sussex use the comprehensive school system and to be honest it fails the brightest children. My DC went to an East Sussex primary school (FYI no parent whinged about me living in Kent and depriving an East Sussex child of the place) and all their friends, who so easily could have passed the 11+, haven't particularly excelled, in fact i would say that my DC are way ahead of them now and that to me is such a shame and a waste of a bright child's potential.

[klmh1968]

The other website referred to has many, many articles lamenting the issues for NW Kent, especially boys, with the influx from out of area children. I've read many articles on that website talking about the difficulty of local appeals, and opinions about how both Judd and Dartford boys have taken opposite standpoints on the issue of spaces for local boys.

Until Judd brought in its catchment it was full time of boys from ,Greenwich at one extreme and Hastings at the other, both in other counties which Kent children living in Tonbridge have no chance of gaining reciprocal school places in due to the distances involved. It's a different matter up in or any area that borders closely with another. Tonbridge doesn't, which is the point. Skinner's is full of boys from the Sussex south coast, boys in TW have no chance of obtaining a reciprocal school place there either.

As previously mentioned, Skinners doesn't appear to be fully of Sussex south coast boys, my DS is in year 11 and most of his year group are the Sevenoaks side of TW.

Parents are able to apply to Sussex schools, a lot of them are undersubscribed, but there is a reason for that!

[ToadMum]

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.

I actually disagree with that point. Judd's entrance criteria is not fair regarding local children. They have children from Bexley and Maidstone in the catchment area purely because they live on the train line. Children that live nearer and not on the train line, although may have a decent bus route, etc are not. That is not fair in my eyes. I actually voiced my dissatisfaction to the governors regarding this point.

Looking at the website, the only DA postcode area in the Inner Area is DA4 0, Eynsford and Farningham, which comes under Sevenoaks. There are no London Borough of Bexley postcodes as far as I can see. I may have missed something, though?

Presumably, though, boys from Bexley would have the same chance as anyone else competing for the 15 'rest of mainland UK' places.

[klmh1968]

It's a different thing entirely when Surrey, London and East Sussex children with an hours commute or more are attending Kent grammars, having eschewed their local proper comprehensive.

So for me, the issue is not children that live within say 5 miles or so, more the ones that are admitted that live 20 miles+ away, in a different county, with proper comprehensive schools. There's a raft of difference.[/quote]

I dont understand why it is ok for children that live 5 miles away to have a grammar school education but not those that live 20+. Some children that live OCC may be nearer in distance.

My DD takes the train from Etchingham to Tun Wells a journey of 17 miles (according to AA) and that takes 20 mins, but Sevenoaks to Tun Wells which is 11 miles takes upto 33 mins on the train. If we based school places on journey time then OCC child would be more deserving of a place.

We all want what is best for a child and as a parent I will try my hardest to get my DC into the best school for them, not the best in the league tables, etc. However, i'm fully aware that having gone down the GS route for both of my DC, a grammar school education in my area, their options were based on their scores and not if i could afford a house in their catchment areas. If their scores were not high enough then basically GS was not suitable for them. I didn't want my DC to scrape into a GS with their low scores, even though they technically passed, and constantly struggle to keep up. As i stated earlier i want the best school for MY DC and in their case it was a GS and not necessarily the nearest one.

Surely to ensure that GS education is given to the brightest children then catchment shouldn't really come into it - otherwise it will only be the DC of parents who can afford to live next door to the school that will attend them?

Finally i wish to apologise for all the posts - I don't know how to post multiple responses on the same email - need to ask my DS

[klmh1968]

[quote=
I actually disagree with that point. Judd's entrance criteria is not fair regarding local children. They have children from Bexley and Maidstone in the catchment area purely because they live on the train line. Children that live nearer and not on the train line, although may have a decent bus route, etc are not. That is not fair in my eyes. I actually voiced my dissatisfaction to the governors regarding this point.[/quote]

Looking at the website, the only DA postcode area in the Inner Area is DA4 0, Eynsford and Farningham, which comes under Sevenoaks. There are no London Borough of Bexley postcodes as far as I can see. I may have missed something, though?
[/quote]

I stand corrected on that point . Because my folks live in Bexley and have a very similar postcode just assumed it was Bexley. However, they are both over 20 miles away from the school and borders Dartford CC. The journey from Eynsford to Ton takes only 32 mins but the only train i can see that will get them to school in time is the 6.32 but they will have approx 90 mins to kill before school starts. The next train is not until 8.37 so will be too late. I may have looked at the incorrect timetable though So technically any DC living in Eynsford will be in catchment as opposed to any DC in my area. Both of my DC are at senior school so catchments, etc do not affect me but i just think it is an unfair system for bright children that are deserving of a GS education.

[ToadMum]

Searching on 'travel from Eynsford to Tonbridge' / '...Farningham to Tonbridge':

Train from Eynsford to Tonbridge about 30 minutes including a 7-minute change at Sevenoaks, leaving about 07.30.

Farningham longer as involves a bus to Swanley as well as changing in Sevenoaks.

Both obviously a longer journey, time-wise, if you don't actually live somewhere handy for the station or on the relevant bus route.

I would have assumed that the parents in these areas would be jolly keen on a boys' grammar being opened in Sevenoaks, but, having seen on the other thread some people's comments about not wanting their DDs to go to the Weald annexe even though it may be more convenient, because they don't want them to be somewhere where there is only their year on site, possibly not?

[salsa]

Edit:
Something wrong with the quotes.