LondonMix

Happy Ramadan!

That sounds fab. If you aren?t looking for a fitted kitchen not sure you need a carpenter. I recently discovered this site (ordered some bedroom furniture from them and they are fab). They will custom paint the furniture any colour you want and they have a nice range of furniture suitable for an unfitted kitchen look. I think you could do something really lovely. http://www.anangelatmytable.com/kitchen-54-c.asp If you are looking for any new fitted unites, I?d recommend British Standard (they are the same as Plain English but as its not bespoke, much cheaper and lovely quality). You?d need a carpenter to fit that but almost any good carpenter can do that. It sounds like you?ll be creating a really unique space so good luck!

Crying is fine. I only get annoyed on flights when parents let the kids kick the back of the chair or allow older children (4+) to talk as loudly as you'd expect on a playground. Whatever happened to inside voices! I never here anyone say that but me...

Its tough. I understand you were doing what was best for your family. However, it can be very distressing for strangers to hear a child cry without context -- that's human nature as we are built to respond to the sound of a child in distress. If it makes you feel any better, know that their intentions were probably noble even though they were entirely out of order. Like Otta, sometimes I feel really distressed and almost want to pick up the baby myself (just deep instinctual reaction) but I know the situation is likely to be more complicated than it appears from the outside and so never actually do or say anything.

There is a lot that goes into ensuring a school's admission policy is meeting broader goals but that is entirely for the community to comment on as a whole after the schools explain their strategies to ensure their intake will be comprehensive and t coordinated with other local schools for a coherent local strategy.

Grobot, given that people in the South of ED (SE22) go to Sydenham Girls and Forest Hill Boys, the idea that some people in SE15 near the border of ED would attend the new school is totally normal. The Charter school is in SE24, which is Herne Hill (the North Dulwich Triangle section, that borders the village) and serves, SE21 and SE22 amongst other areas. To give you all some perspective on the new school: The Charter's catchment is currently 1 mile safe walking (which equates to less than a mile as the crow flies). If the new Dulwich school uses distance alone as the crow flies and its catchment circa 1 mile (this should be very likely as the creation of a new school will expand the catchment of all of the local schools), the new school located at Dulwich Hospital would admit students from all of ED (up to Dulwich Common), all of the Peckham Rye area all the way down to the A202, and parts of Camberwell, Brixton, Nunhead as well of course, Dulwich Village and Herne Hill. Here is a map on Rightmove with a one mile radius from Dulwich Hospital's postcode. http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/map.html?locationIdentifier=POSTCODE%5E1702265&insId=1&radius=1.0&includeSSTC=true&_includeSSTC=on I don't think anyone who reads this forum should be panicking that their child won't be served by this new school. Picking the right admission policy for the school should therefore focus on what the best policy is to serve the community given the policies of existing local schools, social equality, making it comprehensive etc. Also, there is not a shortage of schools to the East of LL. ED Harris boys and Girls both are to the East. What there is a lack of are co-ed schools that serve the area to the East of LL. However, the new school, whatever its admission policy will almost certainly capture every resident of ED as well as many from other areas.

Agree with LadyD. A teenage girl can enjoy sex and have a lot of it with her partner without there being an issue of self-respect. Are you saying she should be more private / less crass?

Agree intexasatthe with everything you said. Each admission policy has pros and cons and a trade off of priorities. I'd be interested to hear both Habs and the Charter's strategy and thoughts in more detail on the specifics of what they think will best serve the community and why. The NVR is perhaps a better measure of true ability (and so fairer) but has the downside of requiring a separate test that some pupils (particularly poor pupils) may not take. I think the issue of vulnerable pupils is a non-issue as most schools don't band children in care etc. Let's see what both schools propose and parents can make an informed decision from there which application to support based on this and other key policies on which the schools may take a different stance (specialisms, planned facilities including shared facilities with other schools, pastoral care).

Can you please provide a link to the research you are referring to? The Sutton Trust (a think-tank with a mission to promote social mobility through education) and the LSE have recently published a research paper showing banding achieves a more comprehensive intake and recommends it in urban areas: http://www.suttontrust.com/our-work/research/item/banding-and-ballots/ Students don't have to sit a separate test to be put in bands by the way-- it can based on the primary school progress testing which all students have to sit as a matter of course. You have the flexibility to address the concern you raise by using the primary results. Its a very straight-forward solution. Lastly, most admission policies with banding do not band SEN pupils. SEN pupils along with children in care get priority admission as normal and only non-vulnerable pupils are placed in bands after that. littlek1cker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The Charter new school working group has not > settled on an admissions policy yet and we still > welcome your views but at the moment I think we > are likely to opt for 'as the crow flies'. We are > keen to plug the local black spots in terms of > shortage of places and those seem to be both in > East Dulwich and up around the Dog Kennel Hill > Estate. We are also actively considering a nodal > point system. Unfortunately whatever the > admissions policy ends up being, this school can't > meet all the local demand for places. > > Personally, I worry about the fairness of banding. > There have been a couple of independent reports in > the last couple of years which have found evidence > that banding policies tend to result in the most > vulnerable children being underrepresented in the > school because to band you have to sit a test so > you can be put into the most appropriate ability > band. The most vulnerable children are less likely > to keep the appointment to sit the test. I think > it is important that any new school is a truly > inclusive community school and for me, banding > doesn't sit very comfortably with this.

Exactly, if Harris's only planning scheme for a primary on the Harris ED Girls site requires building on Metropolitan Open Land, then the Mayor and Secretary of State will have to grant approval in addition to Southwark. Given that the current official projections show no need for a new two form primary (now that Ivydale is expanding) building on the equivalent of green belt land is very unlikely to be deemed necessary by the government and I would personally oppose it as a terrible use of green space. Either Harris needs to find a viable site in Nunhead and Southwark should suspend its plans to expand Ivydale or if no suitable site exists in Nunhead, Harris should NOT build a new primary school and allow Ivydale's expansion to go ahead to meet the local shortage. Both the expansion and a new Nunhead primary are not necessary and would represent a terrible use of tax payer money and limited land resources. The idea that a solution to this fiasco is building another primary in Dulwich which has no need, potentially reducing the facilities for a much needed secondary school is appalling on so many levels.

yes, banded lottery but no distance and of course the scholarships.

Your right. Kingsdale is pure lottery. Lets see what Habs propose. Nodal points is an interesting idea. Most of the schools serving the area are East of LL already. The only co-ed option though is West of LL and it seems like co-ed is what most parents want at the moment.

All of them use ability bands combined with distance ranking within the ability bands. While some use slightly different bands and Kingsdale in addition to distance allocates some places by lottery, all of these schools through banding extend both the geographic reach and ability mix of their schools. A new Habs school could try to align itself with the banding system of the Harris schools to coordinate. As the school does not yet exist, it can determine what is appropriate in this specific local context.

Mrs. Lotte I agree. If Habs adopt banding combined with distance criteria, it would give the greatest number of people a chance to get in and result in a wider catchment than distance alone. Have Habs officially stated the criteria they will propose for the school? I believe most of the local schools use banding and banding is most effective when all schools in a geographical area adopt it.

In my view, the parties involved with Nunhead primary planning are being disingenuous all around. James, if Harris really desire to have the Nunhead primary on Harris Girls ED site, why haven't they put in a planning application for it? They have had years to submit a plan for the council to assess and to date haven't made any real effort to illustrate that the Harris ED Girls site is feasible for the Nunhead primary. Harris make it clear in their letter that they may need to expand Harris Girls to help with secondary places in future as a reason not to put the Nunhead primary there and only you seem to suggest they are actively petitioning for this location right now. However, Renata, James is right about Iveydale. The council was aware of the plans to create an Harris Nunhead before the decision was made to expand Ivydale by two forms based on the discussions on this forum. If you really feel there is no need for additional places in Nunhead (and I tend to agree with you having looked at the projections), why did the council take the decision to expand Ivydale so much with the plans for Harris Nunhead underway? Certainly, by the councils own figures, a single form expansion would have been more appropriate at Ivydale. Was this to undermine the creation of the Harris Nunhead by removing the need for places? James, the campaign that people signed up for was an ED Harris Primary which is being opened on the police site- a great result. A separate campaign for a Nunhead school should have been carried out and wasn't and I think that's wrong. There are 600 signatures for a Dulwich secondary, which is far more than is needed to support the secondary school application. However, I think people would be aghast if this overwhelming support was used to justify the creation of 2 secondary schools nearby without additional consultation as the numbers show only one new secondary is needed in this part of the borough. People sign up based on specific facts and using overwhelming support for one campaign to circumvent the need to consult on the creation of another school seems like using a loophole. The signatories in SE15 for the ED primary may have lent their support because they understood a new primary in ED would ease pressure in Nunhead. Without a separate campaign its impossible to say. The situation feels like a terrible waste of tax payer money both by Harris and the council. That Harris would accept the Dulwich Hospital site and compromise the facilities available to a secondary school just to create a primary school in an area that has no need for one is shameful and not the way one would expect an educational charity to behave. They should look at the greater good regarding local education and if they can't open in Nunhead (and it is questionable anyhow if that is still necessary), they should simply not open. The council should be more respectful of tax payers money and instead of getting into political battles with free schools work to coordinate efforts regarding pupil numbers and strengthen its oversite role via its Admission Forum.

They are also looking to open one in Norwood I heard a while back. It might be that they were keeping as many options open as possible to see which of the possible sites in the vicinity would become viable most quickly. I think a cinema in Norwood would be great but one on London Road, just 5 minutes from Lordship Lane seems very close. Perhpas, they will show different films and complement each other. Sort of like having a 6 screen cinema spread across 2 buildings.

Exactly DaveR. But I thin SJ is just trying to wind people up at this point. The idea that is wrong to buy someone elses house effectively means no rental sector at all which is obvious madness. Renting has a vital role to play-- how would anyone ever people to try a new area of the country, live on their own after university etc. Moreover, not everyone wants to own at every stage of their life.

The argument is silly not the person. The argument goes against the aims of the policy. The fact they think its necessary to stop infighting is just sad

It was open to the public during the festival. I went along. It was a very busy event. Some of the work was great, some not so much in my opinion. C'est la vie.

It?s not just silly, it?s the exact opposite of what is supposed to happen. The DofE isn?t supposed to pick schools. The free school system is about parents picking a school. The DofE has more of an oversight role to ensure the school selected by the community will adhere to the national admission code and national curriculum even if there are unique offerings specific to local interests. The DofE also ensures the school is putting in place management and governance structures that will allow it to be successfully run. The idea that the only way to prevent some of the appalling behavior exhibited to date is to effectively neutralize parental choice is quite a sad statement. The schools should simply put together their individual proposals, consult with the community and then let parents decide which proposal is more appealing.

Ah, harmony and agreement on the EDF. Agree with all of that obviously. Not much more to add. :)

That is not what farm subsidies are for. What thus shows is really a lack of economic understanding. Farm subsidies keep farms open that would close because they can't compete internationally. Must governments view maintaining domestic farming as a national security issue and support farms by 1. Paying farmers to leave parts of their land fallow to reduce supply and prop up prices 2. The US govt also buys their farmers extra supply artificially boosting demand also propping up prices. This food is not ever sold or used commercially 3. Some farmers get direct subsidies as the international competition is such that the above measures to prop up prices artificially to keep the farms viable wouldn't work. Controversially, these subsidies are set so high they force countries that naturally can produce food more cheaply than the EU to become dependant on imports as their farms close. There is concern about food prices per SE. It's a national security issue. Also, I think saying that governments don't care if people can access / afford shelter is crazy. Housing Is heavily subsidised.

Agree Fuschia. I think this is unique to big cities where primary schools really serve very small areas. In the country it matters less. Having a feasible site that will serve the area should be mandatory. Renta, I've read the cabinet information. It seems like either Ivydale should reduce to a single form expansion or the new Harris Munhead should be a single form primary. A single form primary May fit on the existing Harris Girls school better. What's clear is with the expansions and new schools, there are two forms more than specifically needed for Dulwich.

Renta, thanks for the post. Why was Hollydale undersubscribed. Based on published data 160 applications listing the schools as a 1-6 preference were made for only 45 places. http://www.southwark.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/6403/starting_primary_school_in_southwark_201415 Renata Hamvas Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi littlek1cker, > as soon as it was mentioned that the proposed 2nd > Harris Primary may end up on the Harris Girl's > School site, I went to see the Head. She says > there is no free space that could be used to > accommodate the primary. Except for the South > Nunhead area, which is close to the Stuart Rd > Ivydale site, there is not a shortage of places in > Nunhead, two Nunhead primaries were actually > under-subscribed and were allocated children this > year. The figure that you are quoting James, are > not for Nunhead, but the whole of the Peckham and > Nunhead Community Council area. The Harris Free > School Nunhead was incorporated in the Pupil > planning for this area ie assumed to go into SE15. > If it doesn't happen at all, there is predicted to > be a 1 form shortfall of provision by 2016 for the > Peckham and Nunhead area. With the current > expansions and new schools (1 FE from Judith Kerr, > 2 forms from Harris ED and 1 form from Dulwich > Wood extra provision)there is predicted to be > about a 2 form of excess for the Dulwich area for > 2016! The figures of shortfall you quote James, in > your older post are for the entire southern half > of the Borough and don't consider all the new > schools and expansions! Very much greater > Dulwich! > > The actual figures are in the middle of this > Cabinet Document. > http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/g4556/ > Public%20reports%20pack%20Tuesday%2018-Mar-2014%20 > 16.30%20Cabinet.pdf?T=10 > > There will be an increasing shortfall of primary > places in the north of the Borough over the next > few years, and therefore if Harris wants to > provide places where there is need, they should be > looking further north within Southwark for a site. > There is predicted to be a shortfall in Secondary > places in the Dulwich area from 2016, that is why > the Hospital site should be used for a Secondary > School, a local community tailored health facility > and some housing. > > Renata

That isn't entirely true. Part of assessing an application is showing both local demand and local need. My guess is that is why they are calling the school Harris Nunhead even though the support is actually excess support for the ED Harris primary that is opening on the old police site. As there is no need for two new primaries in East Dulwich, they had to make the 2nd application for an area where a shortfall still existed like Nunhead. With that said, at the time the application was assessed James, was the DofE made aware of the LAs plans to expand Ivydale. Also, if the current Head of Harris doesn't feel there is space, before pressuring Southwark, Harris as a minimum should put together plans to support the viability of the site to locate a primary school. Creating a surplus primary in Dulwich should not be a fall back position as there is no need and an 2nd application on that basis would not have been approved by the DofE. The limited sites can be better used for other community purposes. It is not appropriate to have a primary and secondary on the hospital site if doing so compromises the size of the secondary facilities, reduces the amount of residential development or reduces the residual NHS services that would otherwise be accommodated. Most concerning for me though is the assumption that lots of support for a new school can automatically be interpreted as support for two schools. I think this is a dangerous assumption, particularly if the application for the new school is actually then made in a different area.