Go to navigation
It is currently Mon Dec 10, 2018 7:43 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 107 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 11  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2018 10:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:51 am
Posts: 9040
I have pinned this post and added some comments as to who would be included in each section - please let me know if you think they are wrong

Quote:
Applicants are required to sit an entrance test and must achieve the
qualifying score (205) in order to be eligible for admission to the school.
Where the number of eligible applications for admission exceeds the number
of places available at the school, places are offered as follows:

1. Looked After Children / Previously Looked After Children who
achieve the qualifying score. Applicants in this category will be
ranked by test score and then by distance from the school.
Children would have to get of 205+ - unlikely that any who reach 205 would not be given a place, if there were more they would be ranked by score

2. Children attracting the Pupil Premium who achieve the qualifying
score and live within the school catchment area*. Applicants in this
category will be ranked by distance from the school.
would need to get score of 205+ if there are more than 45 children (KEFW) then they would be ranked in distance order

3. If fewer than 45 places (25% of the PAN) are filled by applicants in
category 2, offers will be made to children attracting the Pupil
Premium who achieve the qualifying score and live outside the
catchment area, until a total of 45 children attracting the Pupil
Premium have been offered. If 45 or more places are filled by
applicants in category 2, there will be no offers made from this
category. Applicants in this category will be ranked by test score and
then by distance from the school.
if there are fewer than 45 children with PP and score 205+ then they will look to children OOC, these will be ranked by score so theoretically could be quite distant

4. Applicants who achieve the priority score (220) and live within the
school catchment area*. Applicants in this category will be given
priority if they have an older sibling at the school; then ranked by
distance from the school.
For these children all that is required is for the score to be 220 or over, if they have a sibling at the school that gives them priority otherwise it is distance. High scores / rank will make no difference - can see potential issue with a child getting a score over 220 who lives nearer to another GS than their catchment school?

5. Applicants achieving the qualifying score. Applicants in this category
will be ranked by test score. Where scores are equal, priority will be
given to those with a sibling at the school; then ranked by distance
from the school.
In this category, catchment is not mentioned. The score here is the qualifying score ie 205 and the places are offered in score order.


Mod - proposed KEFW 2020 catchment area and admissions criteria are attached

Link for the consultation https://www.birminghambeheard.org.uk/pe ... ents-2020/


Attachments:
KEFW 2020 proposed admission criteria.pdf [94.28 KiB]
Downloaded 103 times
KEFW 2020 proposed catchment area map.pdf [242.65 KiB]
Downloaded 122 times
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 10:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2018 10:11 am
Posts: 1
Why are they moving back to catchment areas? Are all Birmingham grammar schools going to do this?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 11:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 5:12 pm
Posts: 1415
Location: Birmingham
itisme wrote:
Why are they moving back to catchment areas? Are all Birmingham grammar schools going to do this?


See the FAQs on the KEFW website


Attachments:
KEFW 2020 proposed admission FAQ.pdf [117.63 KiB]
Downloaded 68 times
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 5:08 pm
Posts: 1714
hermanmunster wrote:
if there are fewer than 45 children with PP and score 205+ then they will look to children OOC, these will again be ranked by score so theoretically could be quite distant


Knowing the intention behind consultation is to provide better access to local children and reduce daily commute times, why not fill any leftover PP places based on distance from school too, rather than just prioritise on score. I would argue the same with category 5.

Seem to be sending confusing signals and contradicting the original purpose behind proposal; not that I agree with them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 1:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:51 am
Posts: 9040
MSD wrote:
Knowing the intention behind consultation is to provide better access to local children and reduce daily commute times, why not fill any leftover PP places based on distance from school too, rather than just prioritise on score. I would argue the same with category 5.

Seem to be sending confusing signals and contradicting the original purpose behind proposal; not that I agree with them.


I agree - there is always the risk that there will be a child from considerable distance with a good score and PP who won't be able to afford the travel and the LEA is unlikely to pay up


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 1:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 5:08 pm
Posts: 1714
hermanmunster wrote:
MSD wrote:
Knowing the intention behind consultation is to provide better access to local children and reduce daily commute times, why not fill any leftover PP places based on distance from school too, rather than just prioritise on score. I would argue the same with category 5.

Seem to be sending confusing signals and contradicting the original purpose behind proposal; not that I agree with them.


I agree - there is always the risk that there will be a child from considerable distance with a good score and PP who won't be able to afford the travel and the LEA is unlikely to pay up


Absolutely! And the same goes with category 5, where they can't fill all places with a score of 220+. Why use highest score and not distance, if the intention is to have "local schools for local children". Just seem to be a clever pleasing exercise by KE foundation for those parents who are against these proposals. Foundation knows category 5 will hardly ever be used.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 1:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2017 9:10 pm
Posts: 62
don't think your interpretation of number 2 is correct? There's no mention of score order.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 19, 2018 1:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:51 am
Posts: 9040
Wildfuture wrote:
don't think your interpretation of number 2 is correct? There's no mention of score order.


Well spotted! I'll change it


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2018 7:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 11:18 am
Posts: 208
Hi all

second timer round. This time its my son. We live in walsall and theres no mention of it on the catch meant map! what does that mean for us as I can't work it out


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2018 7:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2016 12:55 pm
Posts: 546
walsallmum wrote:
Hi all

second timer round. This time its my son. We live in walsall and theres no mention of it on the catch meant map! what does that mean for us as I can't work it out


It means your choices are QM Bishop Vesey , Adams


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 107 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 11  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 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 – 2018