Ole

Yep, East Dulwich Charter will have finished its expansion just as the bulge years, for which it was built, passes. Give it a couple more years and they will be consulting on closing down classrooms due to lack of pupils. Brilliant project management they?ve had.

hellosailor Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You make a good point, the school coaches only > take 25 mins to make the journey as they?re doing > it so early. Most arriving at school by 8:00. > If you?re a parent driving your child yourself > leaving home considerably later then it would be > very different. > So it could indeed be a stressful 3 years from > reception to year 3 when you are deemed old enough > for a coach place. That sounds quite grim. So those poor kids must be getting on the coaches as early as 7am? So what time are they having to leave the house then. I used to get the coach at 8.15. School lessons started at 9.45, the coaches left at 4.30pm. It seems counterproductive that kids have such early starts when it is well documented that kids perform better with later starts.

I commuted using a school coach for private schools for all except 2 years. I commuted 1 hour each way from age of 3 starting with kindergarten. It is not good for such little ones. Practical for busy parents, but not great for the child. I didn?t grow up in London. Where I grew up during the 80s the estate options were grim and there were very few choices of private options. If there had been another choice my parents wouldn?t have put me in a school coach so young. I would move closer or find another school.

It?s still a mystery to me why all our neighbouring Boroughs help parents to make informed decisions by publishing historic distance data. Meanwhile Southwark parents are left to guess. Has anyone ever had a viable explanation from Southwark as to why they consider themselves different to every other nearby Borough?

Monkey Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Harris Girls didn?t use to have a broad curriculum > and have recently expanded their choice of > subjects. It?s only in the last two years for > example that they added French and Spanish to > their modern foreign language curriculum. Prior to > that, there was no choice and girls all did > Italian as the only option. Perhaps the boys? > school needs to catch up. Harris Boys have Spanish as their only language option (Key stage 3 and 4). Let?s hope for the sake of the local boys that they do catch up and widen their curriculum! Or if they do offer more choices, they should update their website!

I think what the OP is saying is that, according to what is published on the website, the range of GCSE options for Harris girls is bigger than the range of options for Harris boys. Harris Girls GCSE options: History or Geography, Art, Photography, Business, Citizenship, Computer Science, Drama, Food prep and nutrition, PE, Product Design, Psychology, Sociology Harris Boys GCSE options: History or Geography, Art, Music, RE, Design Technology. Harris Boys then get to choose BTECS (not GCSES) in: Enterprise, Digital Information Technology, Performing Arts, Travel and Tourism. In addition, Harris Girls offers Triple Science whereas Harris Boys offers Double Science. So, according to the websites, Girls have a much wider choice for GCSEs. Interesting that the Girls should have a much broader choice of subjects (and should I say, therefore opportunities?) than the Boys, considering it is the same Academy and serving the same community. Renata, any thoughts as to why? I am aware that schools are free to set their own curriculum, but it seems strange that one of the few Boys school serving the local community is able to have such disparity compared to the Girls' equivalent? I mean, if for religious circumstances I chose to send my child to the local all-boys school, my son would have fewer choices than my neighbour who for the same reason sent their girl to the equivalent all-girls school. Should boys be disadvantaged for choosing single-sex education?

He (The Mayor) also forgot to factor in the Archimedes principle. Closing off roads without putting in measures for the displaced volume was always going to lead to traffic jams. Transport is particularly bad East-West; the gov seems to assume that people only want to travel North-South.

Ole Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Abe_froeman Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > The Mayor is desperate for people to get back > onto > > public transport because TFL has gone bankrupt > on > > his watch. (They won't though because the Mayor > > also said that people will die if they travel > on > > the tube He (The Mayor) also forgot to factor in the Archimedes principle. Closing off roads without putting in measures for the displaced volume was always going to lead to traffic jams. Transport is particularly bad East-West; the gov seems to assume that people only want to travel North-South.

Abe_froeman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The Mayor is desperate for people to get back onto > public transport because TFL has gone bankrupt on > his watch. (They won't though because the Mayor > also said that people will die if they travel on > the tube

I?m simply stating the facts around official wording, excess deaths, and how organisations make decisions.

For some it may be complacency, for others it is weighing up the risk and cost-benefit calculations. NICE do very complicated calculations to decide if a drug becomes available on the NHS, and that is generally accepted. Every day somebody is making decisions, which impact the public, based on cost-benefit-risk calculations. Healthcare systems have developed based on cost-benefit-risk calculations. Vaccine and drug development decisions are based on these calculations.

The wording of the official reported Covid deaths are of people who have died having tested positive for Covid. The official wording is very interesting and has been chosen very deliberately. Note that it is not people who have died OF covid, nor people who have died WITH Covid. This wording implies that if you tested positive for Covid 3 months ago, and then got run over by a bus, you'd be included in the Covid deaths. It also implies that if years later you die of a stroke, you could be included in the official covid deaths number. This wording leaves the door open for all kinds of message for years to come. There is no doubt that there has been excess deaths in these past few months, but there is also no doubt that in the last 2 years there has been very mid flu and respiratory disease seasons with fewer excess deaths. Will this balance itself out by the end of the year? Perhaps, but there is no doubt that there is also going to be a lot more excess cancer, cardiovascular and mental health deaths. There is also going to be increased poverty, and poverty increases morbidity. Will these deaths be counted as Covid deaths? Which is the most credible side? A good statistician can argue for either.

How far are you from from Elmgreen or did you get a sibling place? I?d be interested to know how far the catchment area went this year.

.

Loulou Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What is the point....... > This morning whilst queuing at Sainsbury?s I > watched a gentleman get out of his car, > painstakingly put on a pair of latex gloves, shut > and locked his car then proceed to take a hankie > out of his pocket, gave his nose a pretty > impressive blow, place the hankie back in his > pocket then go and get a trolley - those gloves > now serve no purpose. > > I despair! > > LL From his point of view, the gloves serve the purpose that HIS skin is not going to touch any surface.

Asking for a friend.

My partner is in Sainsbury's now and he tells me there is no: pasta milk tinned stuff, couscous - all that aisle empty paracetamol toothpaste (!!) toilet roll cereals frozen food (apart from ice cream) How much of this is people really hoarding, or sainsbury's just being crap at shelf management? Also many people who would often eat out are now not doing it so demand will generally be up even without frenzied shopping? Sighs. I just want to do our normal weekly shop!

I can?t help with the legal stuff, but I?d suggest keeping a diary of instances where the noise has disturbed your sleep and antisocial events with the date, time, and how it has affected you and your family (you might be already doing this) Good luck, and I really hope you are able to get help!

BellendenBear Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Presumably The Charter School refers to Charter > North Dulwich rather than East Dulwich? Lots of > kids from Lambeth will go to Charter ND such as > those living just the other side of Denmark Hill. > > I?m sure lots of people move away after getting > their eldest child into secondary school and then > subsequent siblings get places. I agree that this > doesn?t seem fair, but I don?t think making things > borough based is possible or makes sense due to > the impact it would have on people living close to > the borders. Wouldn?t it be better to say that the > sibling rule no longer applies if you live at an > address that is further from the school than when > the eldest was admitted? Southwark don?t have > control over this anyway as all our schools are > academies or free schools. > > Having just gone through this process, I would > encourage people to visit lots of schools. There > are lots of other good schools and some very > impressive head teachers around. I know people who live barely 700m on the Lambeth side of North Charter who did not get a place this year.

And in case anybody points out - the Catholic schools also have a high rate of out of borough admissions because they prioritise church-going people so I'm just comparing the rates between non-religious schools.

Renata, I'm attaching a screenshot from this document from 2018 (http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s78194/Report%20Pupil%20Place%20Planning.pdf) which shows that Charter, has a 21% rate of chidren from outside Southwark. This is significantly higher than other Southwark schools (what is the percentage for 2019? Has it gone up or down? I couldn't find it). People move into the area from outside Southwark and then move out and then their siblings get in. Southwark dooes not have access to council tax records from other boroughs so easy from somebody from outside to rent locally for a few months and then move out again. Sourthwark residents can't bend the rules by moving in closer to the school (and then going back 'home') because we would get caught out. However people from outside Southwark are clearly doing this, meaning Charter is not really a school for local kids. Is Southwark going to do anything to addess this problem? Charter is my nearest school yet I won't get a place, however somebody who now lives in Clapham will do. (for the record, I have no problem with the policy of siblings getting in - my problem is for the policy siblings of people who now no longer live in Southwark having priority over local children) I've circled Harris Boys too but I can understand that because it is fairly close to other boroughs, but Charter couldn't be more central. Kingsdale, with an outside proportion of 59% from outside Southwark, where do we even begin? Let's just leave it at that shall we. Wouldn't a much fairer systme be: 1. looked after, etc 2. Siblings of children who live in Southwark 3. Children who live in Southwark 4. Siblings of children who no longer live in Southwark. Or something like that? And why can't councils share council tax records so that renting temporarily to be near a school whilst being a homeowner elsewhere can be stamped out (not completely I get it, but at least pretend to do something about it?).

The school admissions system is nuts. We are about 800m from east charter, our nearest school, and children on our street did not get in. Our second nearest is north dulwich and that?s a definite no, not even after the September shake-uk. Harris boys is a mystery whether we would get in or no, it seems to be pot luck. I don?t understand why the catchments are shrinking so much so quickly. Just a few years ago we would have got into north dulwich and there hasn?t been any significant build locally. Ditto with east dulwich. When the hamlet estate is built on greendale that?s going to shrink east dulwich even more but I understand that because it is new housing. And why does Southwark have 4 girls? school and only 2 boys? school? Renata, any thoughts on that?

There are baby and toddler groups where children are exposed to songs, games, toys, stories etc - is that what you mean? There used to be a great session at Dulwich library 10 years ago, lots of signing with actions. Libraries are a good place to start, they usually do story and singing sessions, and they may have info on crafty activities for pre-schoolers you could go take your bubba to.

Yes, dark ages me too which is why I'm asking as I know things have moved on. 14 sounds ridiculous, I think 9 is the norm. From the website it looked as only 7 so that's why I asked - I didn't know science counted as two etc.

What is the number of gcse subjects charter lets each student choose? According to the website they timetable for 8 (but one is PE?)