LondonMix

Fair banding vs. distance admission can clearly either increase the capability or reduce the capability of a school's intake depending on the school's immediate surrounding neighbourhood's socio-economic make-up. Harris' performance, when assessed by individual pupil performance and how much each individual pupil improves, shows that the school is enhancing performance above national standards expected based on each student's starting point. Banding cannot explain why individual deprived children are making such significant progress compared to their national counterparts. The school is clearly having a positive impact on learning and results and the intake is still very deprived. Banding in East Dulwich would be expected to reduce the average capability of the intake as bands would extend to more socio-economically deprived areas.

Sorry James, I didn't mean to imply it was zero sum but rather that both were interested. I think a bilingual offering would be wonderful locally but that at least one school gets on this viable site is important.

One of the links you posted already had the results adjusted out for equivalents and I still found them impressive to be honest.

You have an ideological view on the matter, which is fine. I have ideological concerns about academies as well but I wanted to know if there was some wrong doing on the part of Harris as part of thinking through these changes. This specific group seem to be doing a phenomenal job, particularly for disadvantaged children and while others haven't they have (at least historically) invested many millions into their schools. I have several teachers in my family here (husband's side). It difficult but as far as academies go, I think I can support this one.

You think the banding results in a higher achieving intake? Don't all pupils outperform / achieve potential according to OFSTED-- see extract for ED Girls? The exclusion rate is less than 1%. You believe that has a massive impact on performance, really? Students enter the academy with well-below-average attainment and, for many, particularly weak literacy skills. Almost all students, including those who are disabled and those with special educational needs, make rapid and sustained progress in most subjects so that, by the end of Key stage 4, attainment is significantly above average. The gap has been successfully narrowed for disadvantaged students, whose attainment and progress are now significantly above their peers nationally.

But do you think the director of the LA should earn more? Do you think a higher salary would attract better talent and improve results in line with Harris? What is your view on standard pay for teachers? Should this be lower or higher and why? All serious questions... Fuschia Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > http://eoin-clarke.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/3-academ > y-school-chains-hand-164-staff.html?m=1 > > If the director of an la responsible for 300-400 > schools and social services for children earns > around ?150k, what justifies Daniel Moynihan > earning so much more, for fewer than 20 schools?

I've read the anti-academies link and despite its best efforts I don't see a strong case. What failing school would not resist being shut down? Especially as Harris has a reputation for firing failing teachers and hiring new staff as part of the process of creating cultural change. The results even when adjusted for GCSE equivalents are still impressive and the exclusion rate is low. Head teachers in inner city London make up to 150k per annum so the fact that 29 people on staff across 19 schools make 60k+ is really not unusual. The academy pays the person who manages all 19 of the schools less than other administrators of academies and pays teachers more than the LA. It has (at least in the past) invested millions into the creation of the schools in the federation. I think this is a very serious matter so besides a philosophical argument against academies in general, what do you really believe Harris is doing wrong, morally or educationally?

So it went up? Where have you gotten your information about that out of curiosity? The article doesn't say Harris pays 300k. What do you think is the right number for this single individual should be and why? Do you know if some of this was performance related and do you think that's a bad way to operate the federation? Do you think they should pay the teachers less to bring it in line with the LA as well? I have concerns about academies too so I am interested to understand the point you are trying to make. Harris to me appears to be a well run charity providing quality education but if there is a legitimate case against it, I'd like to know what it is.

From what I've read, Harris doesn't pay the person that manages all 13+ of its schools that much never mind anyone else. Are you saying you think a director of children's services does a similar job and should be paid more? The charity donated 2 million of its money to the setting up of each of the schools it established (at least the first 9 I am aware of). They also pay their teachers more than the LA. I think we should be careful not to tar the reputation of a charity that has done wonders in many schools on a public forum even by innuendo.

Yes, the trade-off is much more of an American issue

Well James has said that he thinks Harris has the connections to secure the hospital site. The German / English school have also named the hospital site as a possible location within Southwark so draw your own conclusions. If you read all the threads it appears Harris have a better shot at the hospital site and could open up another school serving Nunhead and the Eastern part of ED if they can show parental demand for two new free school primaries run by them. Between SE22 and SE15 the projected shortage totals 235 so realistically to stop the need for bulges up to 3 new large primaries in the general area would be needed. http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?29,1011288,1011807#msg-1011807

A non-profit educational charity which has existed and established successful schools long before (20 years) the new free school system came about being discussed as a private commercial business is perhaps a bit alarmist, no?

No, that's the potential non-ED site for the German/English school. I think the idea is there will be 2 new primaries in our local area (one on the hospital site) run by Harris plus potentially the German / English school if they decide to set up in the area based on a similar thread in the family room. ahoffman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Second possible site is in Rotherhithe, so not v. > helpful for E. Dulwich.

James, would the second site (not the hospital) be in East Dulwich or would it be further east (Nunhead) but potentially serving the eastern section of ED?

But emotionless libertarians won't be able to pick up on the insult / can?t be offended :) I like to think my ideology is pragmatic save for social issues where I like to think I am socially progressive. Still, I must admit it makes me sad that democracy often results in "sub-optimal" decision making and outcomes (though not so much so that I want an enlightened dictator yet)! What does that make me? Cold hearted socio-pathatic utilitarian? Disillusioned liberal?

Yes, the description on second reading does have a whiff of I-robot to it...

Dump 'em, its the only way forward!

I like this description: They appeared to use "cold" calculation to reach utilitarian conclusions about whether (for instance) to save lives by sacrificing fewer lives. They reached correct, rather than intuitive, answers to math and logic problems, and they enjoyed "effortful and thoughtful cognitive tasks" more than others do. Sounds pragmatic and intelligent! Who would want those kind of people making decisions...

The ages don't work for me but will for my neighbour. I will have her get in touch as she doesn't read the forum. James, if you haven't already, I would suggest you perhaps speak to the local nurseries as they will have concentrations of the core age group you are interested in. Also, what will be the primary school admission policy (if you know)? Best of luck to you and the other cllrs. Thanks Pickles for the name correction, Baron Harris of Peckham. I share your concerns and hope that secondary provision moves on to the agenda in conjuction with the creation of the new primaries.

Interesting. I have to say I think Harris is doing a great job and I don't really question their motivations as they are an educational charity (not a private business). Also, the benefactor of the charity, Lord Peckham, has strong ties to South London and this area in particular. Free schools do have to coordinate admissions through the LA and teach core academic subjects. What really concerns me is the feeder policy and planning / future coordination for development of schools. Harris already have a banding system to ensure socially deprived children can get in (not just those rich enough to live close to the school) which is admirable. But the consequences of how free schools will operate need to be really carefully thought through when planning for future secondaries etc. The system is becoming more complicated which is always a negative. But given the results these schools have achieved particularly for socio-economically deprived children, I think overall I am supportive.

I think you are twisting Otta's intention beyond all recognition. I think he means he's okay if a woman doesn't want to or finds that she can't breastfeed (for medical reasons, not working for her family, etc). I can't see how one can take from his statement that he's happy with women getting poor support and advice. I'm sorry you had such terrible support, and perhaps that's influencing you a bit.

Can you explain your concerns in a bit more detail? I'm not having a go, just tryinig to understand. prickle Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Harris is taking over! > > No real issues about the organisation but feel > that there are too many schools now locally > wearing the Harris badge. What's wrong with giving > this money to the council for them to set up new > schools? Why do they have to be free schools? Or > won't Gove let you do that? > > Pls can people consider the repercussion up the > line if this goes ahead. What about secondary > transfer? Would Harris primary pupils get priority > getting into Harris secondaries? > > Really unhappy about this contract going to > Harris.

Hang out with people that make less money than you! You'll save loads and want less :)

I find you very interesting and informative as well...:)

I?m not saying Amazon is a ?good? company but it?s worth going through some microeconomics I think. Please ignore this long / boring diatribe if you are remotely familiar with any of this. Before, taking the stance that the government should close (widely used) ?loopholes? in the existing tax law, it?s important to think through the consequences of this. The loopholes are not mistakes or accidental gray areas. The government has intentionally created ways for businesses to reduce / eliminate tax. Most companies will get a tax ruling from the authorities confirming they are interpreting / using the tax code as intended before implementing any tax strategy so there is absolutely nothing underhand going on and in fact the government actively encourages companies to use the tax code to that end. The question is why does the government want to reduce corporate income tax and why don?t they do it in a more straightforward way? First, real economic profits in any sector are zero from a mirco-economic perspective. This simply means that every business owner (small and large) needs to see a specific return on the money they have invested in their business to think it?s worth their while to operate (rather than sticking the capital in a bond and getting a steady almost risk free income or just spending the money instead). A reduction in income tax has one of two consequences. In an industry with low barriers to entry and for which competition between firms is significant, a reduction in taxes causes prices to fall and businesses to expand for the following reasons. The reduction of tax (which is a cost) increases profits beyond the minimum return someone running a business requires to engage in that activity. This will attract people to open new businesses and the competition / increase supply of goods and services will drive prices down until profit rate for the sector returns to normal. For sectors that have high barriers to entry / are pseudo monopolistic the lower costs of doing business might result in increased production and lower prices but not to the same extent and potentially not at all which is one of the reasons anti-trust and anti-competition laws are so important. As you can imagine, the exact opposite happens when taxes increase. Profitability decreases below the minimum level and businesses close until competition reduces to a level at which prices can increase sufficiently to restore profitability (except again for monopolies). An increase in corporate tax increases the funding of the public sector and reduces the size of the private sector which is a totally reasonable trade-off as there are many things only the government can and should provide to its citizens. However, if by increasing taxes you reduce total economic activity, your actual tax revenue is not going to increase very significantly as there will be less private businesses and less private employment (which depending on what the taxes are used for can be a legitimate trade off). Reducing taxes has the opposite effect (more businesses and private employment and therefore higher income tax receipts etc.) which is why despite the scandals the government is proposing additional tax breaks for small businesses to boost growth. It?s very easy for governments to sell tax breaks for small companies; however, because people hate ?corporations? the tax authorities sneak these in to the tax code intentionally as ?loopholes? that they carefully explain and encourage businesses to use. As others have already mentioned, most ?evil corporations? are owned by pension funds and insurance companies directly or indirectly and therefore, the reduced profitability of major corporations has additional consequences that need to be considered regarding pensions, annuity rates, the retirement age, insurance premiums etc etc etc. With that said, buy what you want. Amazon is no angel and if you are convinced you?ve found a company in line with your moral code on most issues support them.