Go to navigation
It is currently Thu Dec 08, 2016 12:02 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Sep 16, 2014 11:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:10 pm
Posts: 8204
Location: Buckinghamshire
A range of objections to LSS's Admissions Policy, none of which have been upheld by the OSA. Full report here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... p_2014.pdf

Quote:
Conclusion

64. The Order granted in June 2013 gives permission for the school to give priority to children eligible for the pupil premium. The admission authority is therefore acting lawfully in using eligibility for the pupil premium in its arrangements and paragraph 1.9(f) of the Code does not apply in this regard.

65. I have examined evidence from a range of sources and find nothing to support the objections that including priority for admission for pupils eligible for the pupil premium cause indirect racial discrimination or disadvantage to a social or racial group as prohibited by 1.8 of the Code and the Equality Act 2010. The arrangements determined by the school do not contravene the Code.

66. I have considered evidence relating to the other matters raised by the objector relating to the use of catchment areas; the arrangements for administering the 11+ tests; and the definition of home address. I have found no evidence to support the objections that the arrangements do not fulfil the requirements of the Code.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 16, 2014 11:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 5:27 pm
Posts: 3447
Location: london
pretty emphatic then :D

_________________
mad?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 9:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 3:04 pm
Posts: 376
I am sure Gideon will be a bit upset by that ruling :!: :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 10:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 4:33 pm
Posts: 866
I would think that anyone who believes in equality would be upset by the ruling.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 10:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 8:08 am
Posts: 403
There are many who feel equality is best served by such admission changes making them both welcome and necessary.
I appreciate many that disagree but too many people seem to have a very rosy view of what some children are up against, what a huge achievement it is for them to pass the 11+ with little support and active disadvantages and the benefits it will convey to them.
I am very pleased the objections upheld so far have all been on technicalities (where the wording of funding agreements haven’t kept pace with the changes to the Code) and that the LSS objection here has not been upheld.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 11:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 3:04 pm
Posts: 376
I couldn't agree more Loopylou. My DS will be taking the exam and hoping for a place at LSS the fact that there will be slightly less places available to him because they may be offered to pupil premium children is not an issue for us. I have seen children who have so much potential but have just not been given a break in life. That is what is not fair.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 11:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 10:59 am
Posts: 3579
:D happy days! The voice of reasonable community driven behaviour has won over the sentiments of a few frankly misguided individuals. I hope any children benefiting from the pupil premium admissions criteria have a happy and successful journey through school that credits their obvious ability.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 5:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 9:51 pm
Posts: 2237
No surprises, except perhaps in the sheer extent (from the quotes provided in the report) to which the objection was not so much a reasoned statement of facts and arguments as a lengthy rant. I think we've all become familiar with that style though to be honest.

I recommend reading the report itself to anyone who has not yet done so, the school's case was extremely impressive and the paragraph towards the end on the objection to residence requirements was an unexpected delight.

Mike


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 5:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 8:08 am
Posts: 403
Quite. Not only was the objector's tone rather angry (rants about "benefits Britain" no less) but most of his facts were totally wrong. He asserted Asian students are disadvantaged by Pupil Premium priority since (apparently) everyone knows fewer Asian people qualify. This was shown to be incorrect at both a National and local level. He asserted the catchment area led to indirect racism when the opposite was in fact demonstrated (it potentially over not under represents Asian pupils). He also stated the purpose of grammar schools is, or should be, to pit student against student in a Hunger Games style play off with places determined solely on score. That was quite a familiar view having seen a few threads on this subject in the past but it is a view that the Adjudicator and admissions laws do not share.

In contrast, the Adjudicator's response to each of his points was beautifully calm, measured and methodical.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 20, 2014 3:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2013 4:13 pm
Posts: 43
Definitely worth a Read.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 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