Langley Grammer-Local and General admission Areas
Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators
Re: Langley Grammer-Local and General admission Areas
Most admissions consultations tend to go through unchanged or very slightly amended.
However there is nothing to stop you making comments on the proposed changes. just bear in mind Schools usually have good reason for wanting to change them, so you need to put forward a reason for not changing them that is better.
However there is nothing to stop you making comments on the proposed changes. just bear in mind Schools usually have good reason for wanting to change them, so you need to put forward a reason for not changing them that is better.
Re: Langley Grammer-Local and General admission Areas
That's interesting.... not for DD2 who is sitting this year, who I don't think would enjoy LGS, but a few years down the line it may be pertinent for my DSzxxx
As someone who lives fairly nearby I actually think a 3 tier admissions criteria makes sense... at present the "inner cachement" is only selected parts of Langley and Colnbrook, children who live 2 miles away in Iver, Middle Greeen or Central SL1 are treated as much "out of area" as children 15-20 miles away in Twickenham.
I suspect this change is to try and reduce the numbers of children who are bumped out of Slough by grammar-seeking-parents and then have to endure hideous daily travels up and down the A4/M4 corridor.
As someone who lives fairly nearby I actually think a 3 tier admissions criteria makes sense... at present the "inner cachement" is only selected parts of Langley and Colnbrook, children who live 2 miles away in Iver, Middle Greeen or Central SL1 are treated as much "out of area" as children 15-20 miles away in Twickenham.
I suspect this change is to try and reduce the numbers of children who are bumped out of Slough by grammar-seeking-parents and then have to endure hideous daily travels up and down the A4/M4 corridor.
Re: Langley Grammer-Local and General admission Areas
I'm wondering if the other Slough GSs will follow suit. There does seem to be an increasing number of Reading/Wokingham children applying for Slough schools. Having had to do that journey a few times at that time in the morning, I think it madness, but each to their own.Aethel wrote:I suspect this change is to try and reduce the numbers of children who are bumped out of Slough by grammar-seeking-parents and then have to endure hideous daily travels up and down the A4/M4 corridor.
Re: Langley Grammer-Local and General admission Areas
Not withstanding that I sympathise with those regular forum members for whom this is bad news I am only surprised that it has taken the school this long. We are in area 3. DC would not have had to travel by road and could walk at either end of a 'fairly' (by forum standards) short train journey. Nonetheless, in my opinion it was a ridiculous option for us, a 3 stage journey, distance from friends etc. The idea of them attending a school with kids from over 25 miles away (Reading) is totally the opposite of what I would want for their teenage years. As for the school it must drive them potty to be beholden to the travel needs of distant children. That said, if the school was really interested in the needs of its local community perhaps it would abandon selection altogether. It must though be particularly hard on those who have always lived in an area with this in mind, suddenly having to consider moving. Also, I am aware that whilst we have easy public transport access (which IMO should be a significant factor in deciding catchments), there may be people in area 3 who are nearer and for whom the results of this, should it go through, are pretty demoralising.Tinkers wrote:I'm wondering if the other Slough GSs will follow suit. There does seem to be an increasing number of Reading/Wokingham children applying for Slough schools. Having had to do that journey a few times at that time in the morning, I think it madness, but each to their own.Aethel wrote:I suspect this change is to try and reduce the numbers of children who are bumped out of Slough by grammar-seeking-parents and then have to endure hideous daily travels up and down the A4/M4 corridor.
mad?
Re: Langley Grammer-Local and General admission Areas
Grammar schools are centrally funded and so they are not just for those living in close proximity. All kids should have the same opportunity to attend a grammar school. Whether a child lives next door to Langley Grammar or a 20 min bus ride away - it may still be the closest grammar school to both children, and therefore they should both have an equal chance of attending.
Let's just hope the government uphold their Autumn Statement promise of funding £240million towards expansion/increasing grammar schools.
Let's just hope the government uphold their Autumn Statement promise of funding £240million towards expansion/increasing grammar schools.
Life begins at the end of your comfort zone!
Re: Langley Grammer-Local and General admission Areas
Hi DTB, What an interesting view... I have split your paragraph up into sections to respond clearly.
"Grammar schools are centrally funded and so they are not just for those living in close proximity. "
Every state school is "centrally funded", that doesn't mean that folk living 200 miles away have a right to go there. Other posters on this site have told me that the legal basis of applications means that every child has the legal right to apply to the school, but nonchild has the right to be given a place there simply because it is state funded.
"All kids should have the same opportunity to attend a grammar school."
That's a great idea in theory (assuming you support country-wide selective education, not everybody does) but the UK has not had a fully selective system since the 1960s.
So the system you describe just does not exist. What's left is a geographically-based variable system where some areas have several grammars and most have very few.
The result is some folk move to be nearer to a grammar, others happen to live there by coincidence, others ignore it as an option (or choose private selected schooling), and another group ignore the fact thatbthey live a stupid distance away and insist It Is Their Right to send their child to a grammar school by any means necessary. Even if their child might have done equally well at the good/outstanding secondary 300 yards from their front door.
Now: here's the clincher: if you GENUINELY mean what you say that "every child should have the same opportunity to attend a grammar school"..... ARE YOU PREPARING OR TUTORING YOUR CHILD IN ANY WAY FOR THE ELEVEN PLUS?"
Because if you are, my dear, you are not giving every child the same opportunity that you claim you want. The tutored and prepared kids stand a better chance of getting in compared to the unprepared children.
The fact remains: this is not a fair or equitable system. There is no "right" for folks from
20 miles away to go to a grammar school. It's also not fair for the children who are prevented from passing because uber-tutored children perform highly and the naturally bright but less resourced children cannot match them.
" Whether a child lives next door to Langley Grammar or a 20 min bus ride away - it may still be the closest grammar school to both children, and therefore they should both have an equal chance of attending.
Let's just hope the government uphold their Autumn Statement promise of funding £240million towards expansion/increasing grammar schools."
It would be nicer if the government stopped hacking funding to ALL schools including the grammars! The one advantage of more grammars would be the removal of out-of-area travel because everyone would have a relatively local selection of schools they liked.
But there seems to be something magical About the word "Grammar" that draws people in droves, it's seen as the only way.... I am seeking grammar education for my children because I want them to feel it's normal and desirable to learn, for them to feel like they fit in, for them to be happy, motivated and develop confidence at school. NOT because it's "any grammar at any cost".
"Grammar schools are centrally funded and so they are not just for those living in close proximity. "
Every state school is "centrally funded", that doesn't mean that folk living 200 miles away have a right to go there. Other posters on this site have told me that the legal basis of applications means that every child has the legal right to apply to the school, but nonchild has the right to be given a place there simply because it is state funded.
"All kids should have the same opportunity to attend a grammar school."
That's a great idea in theory (assuming you support country-wide selective education, not everybody does) but the UK has not had a fully selective system since the 1960s.
So the system you describe just does not exist. What's left is a geographically-based variable system where some areas have several grammars and most have very few.
The result is some folk move to be nearer to a grammar, others happen to live there by coincidence, others ignore it as an option (or choose private selected schooling), and another group ignore the fact thatbthey live a stupid distance away and insist It Is Their Right to send their child to a grammar school by any means necessary. Even if their child might have done equally well at the good/outstanding secondary 300 yards from their front door.
Now: here's the clincher: if you GENUINELY mean what you say that "every child should have the same opportunity to attend a grammar school"..... ARE YOU PREPARING OR TUTORING YOUR CHILD IN ANY WAY FOR THE ELEVEN PLUS?"
Because if you are, my dear, you are not giving every child the same opportunity that you claim you want. The tutored and prepared kids stand a better chance of getting in compared to the unprepared children.
The fact remains: this is not a fair or equitable system. There is no "right" for folks from
20 miles away to go to a grammar school. It's also not fair for the children who are prevented from passing because uber-tutored children perform highly and the naturally bright but less resourced children cannot match them.
" Whether a child lives next door to Langley Grammar or a 20 min bus ride away - it may still be the closest grammar school to both children, and therefore they should both have an equal chance of attending.
Let's just hope the government uphold their Autumn Statement promise of funding £240million towards expansion/increasing grammar schools."
It would be nicer if the government stopped hacking funding to ALL schools including the grammars! The one advantage of more grammars would be the removal of out-of-area travel because everyone would have a relatively local selection of schools they liked.
But there seems to be something magical About the word "Grammar" that draws people in droves, it's seen as the only way.... I am seeking grammar education for my children because I want them to feel it's normal and desirable to learn, for them to feel like they fit in, for them to be happy, motivated and develop confidence at school. NOT because it's "any grammar at any cost".
Re: Langley Grammer-Local and General admission Areas
Aethel - I have split your responses up into sections to respond clearly.
"Every state school is "centrally funded", that doesn't mean that folk living 200 miles away have a right to go there."
I think you will find that they do. If they fulfill the admissions criteria they do have a right to go there. But 200 miles is a huge exaggeration!
"Other posters on this site have told me that the legal basis of applications means that every child has the legal right to apply to the school, but no child has the right to be given a place there simply because it is state funded."
Every child has the legal right to attend a state funded school - the "right" to go there is if they fulfill the admission criteria for that school. If that means a child living 5 miles or a child living 5 feet from the school are offered a place, then they both have as much "right" to attend the school - irrespective of the distance they live from the school.
"Now: here's the clincher: if you GENUINELY mean what you say that "every child should have the same opportunity to attend a grammar school"..... ARE YOU PREPARING OR TUTORING YOUR CHILD IN ANY WAY FOR THE ELEVEN PLUS?"
Because if you are, my dear, you are not giving every child the same opportunity that you claim you want. The tutored and prepared kids stand a better chance of getting in compared to the unprepared children."
Unfortunately, "my dear", in order to be on a "level playing field" to sit for grammar schools, the majority of people prepare their children. You wouldn't send your kids into their GCSE's without preparation, so why send them into an 11+ examination without preparation??! I don't agree with prepping kids for the 11+ but doesn't mean I wouldn't do it in order to be on par with the majority of other children sitting it.
But my original point was about distance to school. All children whether they are 10 minute walk or a 10 minute drive from a grammar school, should have an equal opportunity to attend "their closest" grammar school. It is not just the right of those living closest to attend.
"The fact remains: this is not a fair or equitable system".
You are completely correct. But until the government improves many (not all) of the "non-grammar" state funded schools, then this unfair system of grammar schools applications will continue.
"Every state school is "centrally funded", that doesn't mean that folk living 200 miles away have a right to go there."
I think you will find that they do. If they fulfill the admissions criteria they do have a right to go there. But 200 miles is a huge exaggeration!
"Other posters on this site have told me that the legal basis of applications means that every child has the legal right to apply to the school, but no child has the right to be given a place there simply because it is state funded."
Every child has the legal right to attend a state funded school - the "right" to go there is if they fulfill the admission criteria for that school. If that means a child living 5 miles or a child living 5 feet from the school are offered a place, then they both have as much "right" to attend the school - irrespective of the distance they live from the school.
"Now: here's the clincher: if you GENUINELY mean what you say that "every child should have the same opportunity to attend a grammar school"..... ARE YOU PREPARING OR TUTORING YOUR CHILD IN ANY WAY FOR THE ELEVEN PLUS?"
Because if you are, my dear, you are not giving every child the same opportunity that you claim you want. The tutored and prepared kids stand a better chance of getting in compared to the unprepared children."
Unfortunately, "my dear", in order to be on a "level playing field" to sit for grammar schools, the majority of people prepare their children. You wouldn't send your kids into their GCSE's without preparation, so why send them into an 11+ examination without preparation??! I don't agree with prepping kids for the 11+ but doesn't mean I wouldn't do it in order to be on par with the majority of other children sitting it.
But my original point was about distance to school. All children whether they are 10 minute walk or a 10 minute drive from a grammar school, should have an equal opportunity to attend "their closest" grammar school. It is not just the right of those living closest to attend.
"The fact remains: this is not a fair or equitable system".
You are completely correct. But until the government improves many (not all) of the "non-grammar" state funded schools, then this unfair system of grammar schools applications will continue.
Life begins at the end of your comfort zone!
Re: Langley Grammer-Local and General admission Areas
Hi DLB (apologies for the incorrect middle initial in my previous post)
I'm sorry you have taken exception to the use of the words <my dear>, and have quoted them back at me in italics to indicate sarcasm and that you do not consider me to be <your> dear. I will cope with the insinuation that you do not approve of my post above.
I nevertheless feel that my points were fair. You are quite right that 200 miles was a deliberate exaggeration. But many folk on here seem to feel it is their right to have a place let's say 25 or 30 miles away just because there no grammar schools nearer.
My points were that just because there is a legal right to apply for a place does not mean it is kind or common sense for the child who is travelling all that distance because the magical word "grammar" conveys some miraculous quality that isn't matched by "outstanding comprehensive".
And lastly, if distance shouldn't matter in your book, why is it part of the admission criteria for pretty much every state school in the country? Could it be that the schools actually WANT some of children to get in to live fairly close to the school? Why do you think that might be?
I'm sorry you have taken exception to the use of the words <my dear>, and have quoted them back at me in italics to indicate sarcasm and that you do not consider me to be <your> dear. I will cope with the insinuation that you do not approve of my post above.
I nevertheless feel that my points were fair. You are quite right that 200 miles was a deliberate exaggeration. But many folk on here seem to feel it is their right to have a place let's say 25 or 30 miles away just because there no grammar schools nearer.
My points were that just because there is a legal right to apply for a place does not mean it is kind or common sense for the child who is travelling all that distance because the magical word "grammar" conveys some miraculous quality that isn't matched by "outstanding comprehensive".
And lastly, if distance shouldn't matter in your book, why is it part of the admission criteria for pretty much every state school in the country? Could it be that the schools actually WANT some of children to get in to live fairly close to the school? Why do you think that might be?
Re: Langley Grammer-Local and General admission Areas
Re: the changes to the admissions criteria, especially the residency rules.
From a spokesperson for LangleyThe school acknowledges that there will be families who are genuinely moving to the local and whose house purchase may not complete by the deadline set out in the admissions policy for 2018 entry. The school encourages families in this situation to have an open and transparent dialogue about the kind of evidence which would provide assurance of their genuine intention to purchase and live in a local house within the timescale was genuine. The school believes there should be no need for any deception – and offers of places will be withdrawn if such practice is subsequently found to have taken place.
