Save our Grammar Schools from the proposed changes

[kenyancowgirl]

So Birmingham Council object to the proposals then? That's what this implies

I thought the petition is addressed to her, rather than started by her....

I have just looked at the petition (out of curiosity). Yes, it is addressed to Jayne Francis, but it was started by Kaja Fawthrop. If you look at Kaja on Linked In (it has the same photo, so pretty sure it's the same person) she describes her job as 'Policy Manager Consultation at Birmingham City Council'

Corporate Consultation and Engagement Manager

Dates Employed
Sep 2011 – Present

Based in the Strategic Research Team, I am responsible for consultation and engagement across the Council. I updated the Be Heard Consultation Website in 2013, procuring a modern solution and establishing a partnership with the third sector, NHS and politicians.
My remit includes Council Policy on legislation such as Duty to Involve and Data Protocols for questionnaires/surveys incorporating the Equality Act 2010.

Surely she should remain neutral?

Disgruntled employee perhaps? Maybe they didn't adopt her proposals......

Very weird....! But for those potentially excluded from applying to the CampHills of this world, perhaps look at KES Stratford, which has just been named West Midlands State School of the Year, 2019, by the Sunday Times (*usual caveats apply about league tables etc; tongue is firmly in cheek; trying to lighten the mood....)

[Enjoyingthejourney]

I think the proposals are brilliant. My son is travelling further than I would have liked, as he did not get a place at his local grammar school, despite a score above 220. Maybe my younger children will not have that issue if they take the 11 plus when their time comes.

If the green bus is an issue, maybe a change.org petition asking for them to continue service for the existing students will be more suitable, rather than the existing misleading one?

[nervousmom]

I think this post has digressed a little, so I will be making one last post!

This is a controversial subject (reminding me of Brexit!!) Rightly or wrongly these changes have been proposed. Everyone has an opinion and everyone is entitled to voice their opinion without being berated for that opinion. There is no right or wrong here.

We will not have the option of sending our next 2 children to FW, but are very lucky to have Warwickshire as an option (KCG - I loved KES and would be extremely pleased if DS2 managed to go there!)

Personally I feel these proposed changes are unfair to some and removing freedom of choice for others.

Someone now in Frankley, less than a mile from FW, falls outside the catchment, yet someone 6 miles away in Kings Norton is in the catchment. Someone in the FW catchment may be against a co-ed school, but now has no choice.

However, I do agree the current system is wrong and needs addressing. That same child 6 miles away may currently not get a place because someone 30 miles away has! This is wrong and does need to be addressed.

We live 6 miles from Camp Hill (not in catchment) but my son chose FW instead, twice the journey time, but he wanted a mixed school, that was his choice.

For those of you who don't know (or don't live in the area) Warwickshire operates a priority circle for its Grammar Schools.

Southern priority circle for Stratford schools and Alcester and Eastern priority circle for the schools in and around Rugby. Some areas overlap, so these people are lucky to have a choice.

I'm not sure the origin or size of Eastern, but Southern has a centre point of the fountain in Rother Street in Stratford and has a diameter of 16.885 miles from this point.

Each of the 3 schools has an Automatic Qualifying Score, so if you are in the circle and score above AQS, you should gain a place. If any places are remaining, OOC children with the highest scores can gain a place.

A fair system, I think, offering local schools for local children and more importantly, offering choice.

If the Foundation introduced a similar system, it would be fairer (although those who fall outside the circle wouldn't agree)

The circle for Warwickshire is quite large, but as Birmingham and surrounding areas are more densley populated, the circle would need to be smaller and drawn around each individual school. With each school having its own AQS.

Some lucky people would fall under two or maybe more circles, giving them choice.

More importantly I believe it would be fairer, giving choice whilst still allowing local children a chance of a GS education.

[MSD]

People have been saying that the independents will benefit from more high scorers from outside Birmingham going their way. I think they’ll also get more lower scorers from Birmingham ie those scoring between 210 and 219 who used to be able to choose HGS or KEA and will no longer have that option. Arguably the independents will lose quite a few in the 220s who will now have the option of FW or the Camp Hill schools. If you look back there’s always a few who choose KES/KEHS for this reason - my daughter was one, as it was a nearer option than Sutton girls for us in south Birmingham.

So overall I can’t see that these proposals will necessarily benefit the independents at all and I’m sure that’s not why they’ve been proposed - contrary to what the petition suggests!

Good points there Crazycrofter and it does sound perfectly feasible. I have another theory though, which you may find equally feasible.

a) reading some of the comments on petition, the changes may have raised enough doubt in parents’ mind on the potential makeup of high performing KE schools, thereby pushing those high scorers within catchment over to the independent sector.

b) the changes as they stand now will reduce grammar access for many high scoring OOC candidates. They will naturally look for alternatives and will find KES/KEHS to be quite attractive

c) intake for these two independent schools isn’t that high. They will easily find many high scoring candidates who wouldn’t either have access to grammars or would no longer be interested as a result of proposals

[MSD]

I think this post has digressed a little, so I will be making one last post!

This is a controversial subject (reminding me of Brexit!!) Rightly or wrongly these changes have been proposed. Everyone has an opinion and everyone is entitled to voice their opinion without being berated for that opinion. There is no right or wrong here.

We will not have the option of sending our next 2 children to FW, but are very lucky to have Warwickshire as an option (KCG - I loved KES and would be extremely pleased if DS2 managed to go there!)

Personally I feel these proposed changes are unfair to some and removing freedom of choice for others.

Someone now in Frankley, less than a mile from FW, falls outside the catchment, yet someone 6 miles away in Kings Norton is in the catchment. Someone in the FW catchment may be against a co-ed school, but now has no choice.

However, I do agree the current system is wrong and needs addressing. That same child 6 miles away may currently not get a place because someone 30 miles away has! This is wrong and does need to be addressed.

We live 6 miles from Camp Hill (not in catchment) but my son chose FW instead, twice the journey time, but he wanted a mixed school, that was his choice.

For those of you who don't know (or don't live in the area) Warwickshire operates a priority circle for its Grammar Schools.

Southern priority circle for Stratford schools and Alcester and Eastern priority circle for the schools in and around Rugby. Some areas overlap, so these people are lucky to have a choice.

I'm not sure the origin or size of Eastern, but Southern has a centre point of the fountain in Rother Street in Stratford and has a diameter of 16.885 miles from this point.

Each of the 3 schools has an Automatic Qualifying Score, so if you are in the circle and score above AQS, you should gain a place. If any places are remaining, OOC children with the highest scores can gain a place.

A fair system, I think, offering local schools for local children and more importantly, offering choice.

If the Foundation introduced a similar system, it would be fairer (although those who fall outside the circle wouldn't agree)

The circle for Warwickshire is quite large, but as Birmingham and surrounding areas are more densley populated, the circle would need to be smaller and drawn around each individual school. With each school having its own AQS.

Some lucky people would fall under two or maybe more circles, giving them choice.

More importantly I believe it would be fairer, giving choice whilst still allowing local children a chance of a GS education.

+ 1

spot on Nervousmom! I like Warwickshire set-up too.

[Emmal]

Good points there Crazycrofter and it does sound perfectly feasible. I have another theory though, which you may find equally feasible.

a) reading some of the comments on petition, the changes may have raised enough doubt in parents’ mind on the potential makeup of high performing KE schools, thereby pushing those high scorers within catchment over to the independent sector.

b) the changes as they stand now will reduce grammar access for many high scoring OOC candidates. They will naturally look for alternatives and will find KES/KEHS to be quite attractive

c) intake for these two independent schools isn’t that high. They will easily find many high scoring candidates who wouldn’t either have access to grammars or would no longer be interested as a result of proposals

MSD - do you agree that, if your theory proves true, that's a good thing? i.e. that parents who have the luxury choosing between independent schools and grammar schools are encouraged down the independent route?

[MSD]

Yes, I would agree with that Emmal! At the expense of grammars losing them though.

[MSD]

Good luck with that. A number of them can't even spell grammar.

I am sure members of the consultation panel reading these comments will be wise enough to ignore spelling mistakes and look at the actual argument being put across, rather than judge people on their ability to articulate and spell. You will find many migrants who move to UK, in search of better life and opportunities for their children, may not have similar command on English language as many of us here. I do really commend them for not shying away from putting across their viewpoint, despite this language barrier.

[nervousmom]

Good luck with that. A number of them can't even spell grammar.

I am sure members of the consultation panel reading these comments will be wise enough to ignore spelling mistakes and look at the actual argument being put across, rather than judge people on their ability to articulate and spell. You will find many migrants who move to UK, in search of better life and opportunities for their children, may not have similar command on English language as many of us here. I do really commend them for not shying away from putting across their viewpoint, despite this language barrier.

+1

[MSD]

So Birmingham Council object to the proposals then? That's what this implies

I thought the petition is addressed to her, rather than started by her....

I have just looked at the petition (out of curiosity). Yes, it is addressed to Jayne Francis, but it was started by Kaja Fawthrop. If you look at Kaja on Linked In (it has the same photo, so pretty sure it's the same person) she describes her job as 'Policy Manager Consultation at Birmingham City Council'

Corporate Consultation and Engagement Manager

Dates Employed
Sep 2011 – Present

Based in the Strategic Research Team, I am responsible for consultation and engagement across the Council. I updated the Be Heard Consultation Website in 2013, procuring a modern solution and establishing a partnership with the third sector, NHS and politicians.
My remit includes Council Policy on legislation such as Duty to Involve and Data Protocols for questionnaires/surveys incorporating the Equality Act 2010.

Surely she should remain neutral?

Helen, I see where you are coming from but I am not sure if it’s appropriate to paste someone’s personal profile on a public forum without their permission. Might be serious invasion of their privacy