Judd / Skinners 2010 admissions

tonup · Post by **tonup** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 1:10 pm

Cory wrote:I do not have the figures on me, but later I can count exactly and give you exact percentages.

I am talking about the grammar schools in West Kent in the aggregate so it may be that one class in Skinners or indeed the whole year group is below the level across all grammar schools. Although I doubt it because most of the other schools have a West Kent catchment area.

The figure is not an anomaly. KCC have made it quite clear that there is a trend-line of escalating numbers of children from outside West Kent grabbing at a no-risk chance of a Kent grammar school education. I expect the proportion to hit 50% in 2010 or 2011. At which point the number of West Kent children being allocated places in Dover, Sittingbourne and Folkestone will hit some 400.

Anyway an exact count across the 2009 year group for Skinners would be very interesting.

Twinkle · Post by **Twinkle** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 2:15 pm

In the Adjudicator's decision he clearly recognises that there is a big issue that needs resolving saying

"I believe that the best way to tackle this issue is by detailed
planning on the basis of consensus on the part of the Council and the
grammar schools of the area. The Schools claim that six grammar school
headteachers have requested a meeting with representatives of the Council,
and I recommend the Council to capitalise on that readiness to meet for
discussion. In not upholding the objections, I am not suggesting that there are no issues to be discussed, or that those issues should not include the
respective admission arrangements of these two Schools and other schools in the County. Indeed, I believe that the objector may have performed a useful service in bringing these issues to the forefront of consciousness. I
recommend the Council and the Schools to engage in this task. "

Does anyone know whether a meeting between the schools and KCC has gone ahead as recommended ( and perhaps alluded to in the joint press statement)and whether there has been any substantive progress? Also, what are our MPs doing to resolve the situation for boys in West Kent?

Twinkle

tonup · Post by **tonup** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 4:16 pm

What has happened is that up to 2005 Judd (and almost certainly Skinners) had a local catchment area. To quote from the Judd 2005 Prospectus, for admission in 2006:

"Boys are normally admitted in the September following their eleventh birthday as a result of the Kent Selection Procedure for Secondary Education. There is a limited number of Governors' places, usually awarded to boys who live in the reorganised (comprehensive) areas of Kent or who are out of County. Interested parents should write to the Headmaster."

Source: http://web.archive.org/web/200412052049 ... ectus.html

By 2007, for admission in 2008 two admissions round ago, without consulting the local schools or parents Judd shifted the goalposts to:

"There is no catchment area and admission is based upon academic merit"

Source: http://web.archive.org/web/200703071020 ... pectus.htm.

Because they didn't consult on the change and because local headteachers are snowed with paperwork under nobody picked up on the importance of the change. So the local problems began gradually in 2007 and 2008 but nobody put two and two together. By 2009 admissions reached catastrophic levels. 2010 will be even worse and 2011 worse again as parents in surrounding areas realise that they have nothing to lose by putting their children into the Kent 11 plus and everything to gain.

The schools must have set out to replace local children with out of area children, otherwise why would they have made this change? In a nutshell Judd and Skinners have stolen our schools places from under our noses in a pathetic attempt to push themselves a few places up the league tables. It stinks.

A local headteacher has told me that the Schools have a strategy of 'expressing regrets and shedding tears of sorrow' but not actually doing anything. Because they are independent, KCC is powerless to do anything. So the schools will happily attend meetings until the cows come home, wringing their hands and tut-tuting. But nothing will change.

Write to Michael Fallon by all means but he is about as useless as a chocolate teapot, but a lot more expensive. Twinkle, if you are in the area and you want to do something talk to your headteacher about the situation. You could also email Martin Vye, chair of the admissions forum at martin.vye@kent.gov.uk. I am told that the admissions forum are beginning to take an interest in what Judd and Skinners are playing at.

Villagedad · Post by **Villagedad** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 5:06 pm

tonup wrote:What has happened is that up to 2005 Judd (and almost certainly Skinners) had a local catchment area. To quote from the Judd 2005 Prospectus, for admission in 2006:

"Boys are normally admitted in the September following their eleventh birthday as a result of the Kent Selection Procedure for Secondary Education. There is a limited number of Governors' places, usually awarded to boys who live in the reorganised (comprehensive) areas of Kent or who are out of County. Interested parents should write to the Headmaster."

Hi tonup

Is the local catchment area part the bit that says "as a result of the Kent Selection Procedure for Secondary Education", ie did this procedure state a catchment? And what generally was it?

Many thanks for digging this up.., as it will give everyone more ammunition.

Cheers
Villagedad

Just1-2go · Post by **Just1-2go** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 5:11 pm

He-who-must-not-be-named has added :-

"The 42 boys from East Sussex offered places at Judd and Skinners in March equates with the number from the West Kent selective area denied places at a local grammar school because of the two schools' admission policies, but were instead directed to grammar schools in Folkestone or Sittingbourne. There is therfore little disparity, directly contrary to their claim."

Although I was also surprised, on seeing this years class lists from Skinners, that a lot of the boys were local with only 16 from East Sussex and 4 or 5 from Croydon/Ashford etc. That is actuallly less than the Governors places available to out of area children at TOGS.

tonup · Post by **tonup** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 5:27 pm

Is the local catchment area part the bit that says "as a result of the Kent Selection Procedure for Secondary Education", ie did this procedure state a catchment? And what generally was it?

Good question. The Prospectus makes it clear that there was a catchment area and that special procedures were required in order to attend the school from out of the area but it doesn't expressly spell out what the catchment area was. I don't know if:

1. There was an explicit catchment area which was not stated in the Prospectus; or,
2. There was an implicit catchment area because only children living in West Kent were able to take the 11 Plus; or,
3. Children outside West Kent were allowed to take the test but none actually took it.

The reference to a special procedure suggests that out of area children were not taking the test. I suppose an FOI request to KCC about the 11 Plus might dig up the answer.

The explicit/implicit catchment area must have been the 'unreconstructed Scheme of Education in West Kent' (think that I got that right) in other words the part of West Kent that remained selective throughout the nationwide change over to comprehensive education.

pheasantchick · Post by **pheasantchick** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 5:31 pm

Out of curiosity, what distance from Judd/skinner do you consider to be 'out of catchment' (although there is no official catchment)?

Also. if someone has got the brains to fulfil the school's selection process, why should they be denied a place because they don't live within 'x' miles of the school.

Just random thoughts to add to the debate!

Just1-2go · Post by **Just1-2go** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 5:39 pm

It couldn't be done on pure distance, as the Schools are so close to the county border. That would include children from Groombridge or Frant who are out of county, but still exclude some of those who are within Kent such as north of Sevenoaks.

Villagedad · Post by **Villagedad** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 6:18 pm

pheasantchick wrote:Out of curiosity, what distance from Judd/skinner do you consider to be 'out of catchment' (although there is no official catchment)?

Also. if someone has got the brains to fulfil the school's selection process, why should they be denied a place because they don't live within 'x' miles of the school.

Just random thoughts to add to the debate!

Let's not forget TWGGS gets excellent results (equivelent to Judd/Skinners etc) with a very tight catchment area.. 2 miles or so

What's wrong with having local schools for local children ..?

Villagedad · Post by **Villagedad** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 6:22 pm

Just1-2go wrote:He-who-must-not-be-named has added :-

"The 42 boys from East Sussex offered places at Judd and Skinners in March equates with the number from the West Kent selective area denied places at a local grammar school because of the two schools' admission policies, but were instead directed to grammar schools in Folkestone or Sittingbourne. There is therfore little disparity, directly contrary to their claim."

And here lies the problem...

It seems madness to make children travel huge distances both ways, ie 42 boys into West Kent from East Sussex, and 42 out to Folkestone or Sittingbourne for a couple of extra marks (I should imagine that's all it is) either way