Proposed admission Criteria B'ham Grammars 2020

[Skylark]

I've just found this and wondered if it applies to this situation:-

Greenwich Judgement
The Greenwich Judgement of 1990 declared as unlawful a decision by Greenwich Local Education Authority (LEA) to give priority in school admissions to its own residents over residents from neighbouring LEAs, clarifying that applicants must be treated equally, whether they reside inside or outside the authority.[1] It has been associated with a decline in the use of catchment areas as a means of managing school admissions,[2] and an associated increase in cross-border mobility.[3]

It also says this if you continue reading on from that;

More recently there have been Local Authorities who have set up new catchment areas coinciding with their borough boundary, and these have been judged to be acceptable by the Schools Adjudicator.[19] Catchment area boundaries, in common with other over-subscription criteria used in admissions policies, must not unfairly disadvantage children from particular social or racial groups.[8]

[MSD]

I've just found this and wondered if it applies to this situation:-

Greenwich Judgement
The Greenwich Judgement of 1990 declared as unlawful a decision by Greenwich Local Education Authority (LEA) to give priority in school admissions to its own residents over residents from neighbouring LEAs, clarifying that applicants must be treated equally, whether they reside inside or outside the authority.[1] It has been associated with a decline in the use of catchment areas as a means of managing school admissions,[2] and an associated increase in cross-border mobility.[3]

That's interesting nervousmom. This consultation has certainly generated a lot of interest - in the past couple of days I have heard, directly or indirectly, from at least 4 or 5 parents, who have a place at KES/KEHS for next year's entry and scored enough for a KE grammar, but now in a dilemma which one to choose. They were all set for grammar, if it wasn't for the new plans. If this is the case for entry in 2019, I wonder what will happen in 2020, when these proposals are meant to kick in, if passed.

[nervousmom]

I have been looking at the petition and reading some of the comments that have been posted and one in particular caught my attention.

"Children who are academically very able but have a Solihull postcode (including my own chi!d) will no longer have access to schools which are designed for their specific needs if the proposal goes ahead. For us as a family, the only school available which we are in catchment for has poor Ofsted results and a poor reputation. To me this situation is completely unacceptable."

Why should people living outside Birmingham be prejudiced against in this way. These schools should be equally available to all children in the Midlands. .

My brother in law comes under worcestershire LEA, but their address is Birmingham, ,they are 1 mile from the Camp Hill catchment.

Changes are needed, but the proposed way isn't the right way.

[quasimodo]

I have been looking at the petition and reading some of the comments that have been posted and one in particular caught my attention.

"Children who are academically very able but have a Solihull postcode (including my own chi!d) will no longer have access to schools which are designed for their specific needs if the proposal goes ahead. For us as a family, the only school available which we are in catchment for has poor Ofsted results and a poor reputation. To me this situation is completely unacceptable."

Why should people living outside Birmingham be prejudiced against in this way. These schools should be equally available to all children in the Midlands. .

My brother in law comes under worcestershire LEA, but their address is Birmingham, ,they are 1 mile from the Camp Hill catchment.

Changes are needed, but the proposed way isn't the right way.

I understand your concern and anguish.
What are the trustees of the charity the school belongs to trying to achieve.They have to act in the best interests of their charity and to achieve the original purposes of the charity to educate poor children in Birmingham.One of its foundations principles is to have the schools rooted in their communities and be responsive to their communities.They did that initially with pupil premium and I was initially opposed to that on instinct rejecting anything which discriminates between pupils and because while coming from those same pupil premium backgrounds we managed to overcome barriers without any assistance why should others need them.I have recognised that some people are not getting the opportunities they deserve and have now changed my mind about it.Like all systems it is not perfect and I also recognise having dealt with all types of fraud in many areas in my past working life that this system is not immune either.Until we have a better system this is the system as it is working to educate poor children

It is also clear there are children attending KE schools outside of Birmingham and therefore outside its charitable purpose.I think anyone who is to argue this needs to argue on what the definition of Birmingham is as I recall when my family lived in Willenhall about 20 years ago half way between Wolverhampton and Walsall we had postcodes,telephone codes and council tax bills between the two authorities depending on exactly where you lived.I think it might be worth developing such arguments and using the arguments on distance from the school.I don’t know how successful this could be.
Good Luck for the future and I am sure it will work out for your children wherever they go to school in the future.

[MSD]

What are the trustees of the charity the school belongs to trying to achieve.They have to act in the best interests of their charity and to achieve the original purposes of the charity to educate poor children in Birmingham.

And that's understandable Quasi - provide education to bright but poor children, who otherwise can't afford to attend independent fee paying schools. Has the foundation managed that over the years though?

I understand the foundation has been in place for many decades and only recently introduced PP places, which was a breath of fresh air, as far as their founding principles are concerned. Do you think there would be case now, while they look at making these changes, to go a step further and fill all places with PP candidates, unless they can't find enough in each catchment and look for PP outside on distance again? I understand rules governing the definition of PP candidate are a little loose and lend themselves to abuse, but let's keep that aside for a moment.

[Skylark]

I have been looking at the petition and reading some of the comments that have been posted and one in particular caught my attention.

"Children who are academically very able but have a Solihull postcode (including my own chi!d) will no longer have access to schools which are designed for their specific needs if the proposal goes ahead. For us as a family, the only school available which we are in catchment for has poor Ofsted results and a poor reputation. To me this situation is completely unacceptable."

Why should people living outside Birmingham be prejudiced against in this way. These schools should be equally available to all children in the Midlands. .

My brother in law comes under worcestershire LEA, but their address is Birmingham, ,they are 1 mile from the Camp Hill catchment.

Changes are needed, but the proposed way isn't the right way.

I understand your concern and anguish.
What are the trustees of the charity the school belongs to trying to achieve.They have to act in the best interests of their charity and to achieve the original purposes of the charity to educate poor children in Birmingham.One of its foundations principles is to have the schools rooted in their communities and be responsive to their communities.They did that initially with pupil premium and I was initially opposed to that on instinct rejecting anything which discriminates between pupils and because while coming from those same pupil premium backgrounds we managed to overcome barriers without any assistance why should others need them.I have recognised that some people are not getting the opportunities they deserve and have now changed my mind about it.Like all systems it is not perfect and I also recognise having dealt with all types of fraud in many areas in my past working life that this system is not immune either.Until we have a better system this is the system as it is working to educate poor children

It is also clear there are children attending KE schools outside of Birmingham and therefore outside its charitable purpose.I think anyone who is to argue this needs to argue on what the definition of Birmingham is as I recall when my family lived in Willenhall about 20 years ago half way between Wolverhampton and Walsall we had postcodes,telephone codes and council tax bills between the two authorities depending on exactly where you lived.I think it might be worth developing such arguments and using the arguments on distance from the school.I don’t know how successful this could be.
Good Luck for the future and I am sure it will work out for your children wherever they go to school in the future.

Excellent post Quasimodo.

[clover4green]

the situation might be is there won't have many 220s in the catchment, the rest place (30%-50%) will still be chosen by score.

[KH1970]

the situation might be is there won't have many 220s in the catchment, the rest place (30%-50%) will still be chosen by score.

I think that’s unlikely. I know of around 10 girls in my daughter’s primary school
alone who scored over 220 (and I don’t know that many parents!) and we live in Kings Heath. There will only be around non pp 90 places at Camp Hill girls won’t there?

I had heard that they were discussing offering 45% pp places but think it was Camp Hill who was against that.

[mike1880]

My personal opinion FWIW is that they should just have a 205 qualification for PP, select on catchment initially and then OOC purely on distance, and similarly a straight 220 for non-PP with automatic entry in catchment and with OOC likewise purely on distance. That would meet pretty much all the objections we've heard so far. Anyone who is closer to an OOC GS than to their own catchment school could still put their nearer school as first choice and have a prospect of getting in, as would people over the border in Bearwood etc.

It would not, of course, meet the objections of the would-be Camp Hill parent who apparently object to the levelling of qualification scores.

[quasimodo]

What are the trustees of the charity the school belongs to trying to achieve.They have to act in the best interests of their charity and to achieve the original purposes of the charity to educate poor children in Birmingham.

And that's understandable Quasi - provide education to bright but poor children, who otherwise can't afford to attend independent fee paying schools. Has the foundation managed that over the years though?

I understand the foundation has been in place for many decades and only recently introduced PP places, which was a breath of fresh air, as far as their founding principles are concerned. Do you think there would be case now, while they look at making these changes, to go a step further and fill all places with PP candidates, unless they can't find enough in each catchment and look for PP outside on distance again? I understand rules governing the definition of PP candidate are a little loose and lend themselves to abuse, but let's keep that aside for a moment.

The foundation are going a step further by increasing pupil premium children from 20% to 25% in their proposals.They have the figures and that’s their view on how far they can push it at present.In everything there is a balance to be maintained.
The foundation will be able to make its own assessments in 2020 and 2022 when the pupil premium cohorts take their first GCSE’s and A levels and how many of the pupil premium cohort went on from their GCSE ‘s to take A levels.
Like everything the Foundation do its a work in progress.