intexasatthe moment

FatherJack - representing the Charter on the forum has to be done by the head . Of the 14 meetings (Sept 2006 to Nov 2011 ) shown on Southwark's site Dave Sheppard ( hope I've spelt that correctly ) has attended twice . It looks as though many heads attend very rarely so this seems to be quite usual . Carbonara- I quite agree with you . But I've seen nothing that would lead me to believe that Southwark will help or take any action on this - although I believe that it is actually a requirement in the Admissions Code that policies should be clear and understanable . I've got a feeling ( could be wrong ) that the Admissions Code also says something about schools using a common test if they are testing for banding but this extract from the Admissions Forum minutes (29/9/10 ) Testing arrangements ? as academies want to carry out their own individual tests, the LA will no longer be co-ordinating this across Southwark. Academies and Kingsdale School are expected to carry out their own banding tests. gives an idea of who is really dictating procedures and how concerned Southwark are to ensure a smooth admissions process for children to go through . And this extract from the constitution clearly shows Southwark's aim to comply with the Admissions Code The Admission Forum must act in accordance with the provision of the Code and should refer an objection to the Schools Adjudicator where it identifies policy, practice or oversubscription criteria that may be unfair or that do not comply with the manadatory provision of the Code; and ,bearing in mind what happened at the Charter ,the gap between the aim and obligation and the practice .

Carbonara - link here http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200142/school_management/1007/schools_admissions_forum/1 Although you'll notice from this that the last published minutes relate to a meeting on 7 Feb 2011 . This plus the fact that Southwark appears to have allowed the Charter school to carry on mismanaging it's admission policy for over 10 years might lead you to think that it's a rather disinterested ,powerless talking shop . I may be unfairly critical ,perhaps I misunderstand it's role ,although it's published aims What the forum does The forum has a key role in ensuring the admissions system is fair, that it promotes social equity and does not disadvantage children. It also ensures that the admissions system is straightforward and easy for parents and carers to understand. Forums also monitor the local authority to ensure that we are complying with the schools admissions code. seem clear enough . It would be good to hear what Glenn Garcia Head of Pupil Access Children's Services Southwark Council has to say on Southwark's role generally and including the Admissions Forum on what we can expect in terms of monitoring ,applying an overview ,helping to ensure that admissions policies are both fair on paper and in practice .

Because I've had some difficulty in obtaining clear information from Southwark councillors ( not James as it happens ) on this subject I am posting a few points below in case anyone else is interested or confused ( as I was ) . It is no longer compulsory for local authorities to have Admissions Forums - but they are free to retain them if they wish to do so . The adjudicator is required to consider whether admission arrangements comply with the Admissions Code and relevant law (Admissions Code paragraph 3.1). Under the new code the Adjudicator no longer tells the admission authority how to change their admission arrangements. Previously if there were several possible changes that would bring the arrangements into compliance the Adjudicator would tell the admission authority which changes to make. Now the Adjudicator simply tells the admission authority what is wrong and it is up to them to fix it. Local authorities must continue to provide annual reports to the Adjudicator as to how school admissions are working, they are now also required to publish them locally - paragraph 3.23 of the Admissions Code. I'm not an expert on this subject - I imagine fairadmissions who posted on the Charter thread might be - and it's taxed my brain cells a bit to glean this information . If I'm giving incorrect info then I'll be interested to hear the details .

Thanks for clearing that up James .

Absolutely needs to come into warm now ,though maybe too late if it's been out all day :(

Renata - it's no longer compulsary for LA to have an Admissions Forum . But that doesn't answer the question as to whether Southwark will retain theirs . I would have thought that given that one secondary school in Southwark has been shown to be manipulating their admissions policy that this would make people think that there is a great need for Southwark to retain their Admissions Forum . Though I don't quite know where to go with the thought that having an Admissions Forum clearly had no impact at all on the Charter's misspractice .

Mike_B - yes the home made produce bought from outside Roulier White was given an enthusiastic thumbs up by a very fussy ,difficult to please 91 year old mother . If she can't find fault with it ,nobody can !

mima that sounds lovely . How feasible would it be to visit without a car do you think ?

I can't seem to find out definitely whether they have or not . I expect Renata or someone will be back at some point to confirm or deny . If the Admissions Forum has gone I guess it's just an admission that now all the boroughs secondary schools are run by sponsors ,governing bodies etc that Southwark are stepping even further back and just leaving it to the individual schools and parents to get on with the business of education . Sadly ,given their involvement with admission matters at the Charter perhaps I shouldn't be bothered .

Fred I have to agree with you ,we had the same problems 10 years ago and sadly we're still suffering from the negative effects of a poor secondary school experience . I know lots of people will take the view that if there's enough parental support /input that the child will thrive in any school environment but this isn't always the case . It's still not possible for every child to go to a good local school - especially if you want a co-ed environment .

Renata - is Southwark ditching it's ( apparently useless as far as meeting it's stated aims to ensure that the admissions system is fair, that it promotes social equity and does not disadvantage children. Additionally to ensure that the admissions system is straightforward and easy for parents and carers to understand. ) Admission Forum ?

Is it possible that the other sibling asked them what they wanted and that the request is a result of that ? ( I've been guilty of similar in our large family whose mother endlessly disposes of carefully selected gifts )

What skyblue said !

The link to the report is still on page 2 of this thread . It's https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B9GB1PQuo9iAODYyYzZiMWEtYzEzYS00Y2U3LWE4M2MtNTJiMzhiNjc5YzZl for easy access .

It seems shocking that a school can choose to administer it's admission policy in the way that Charter did ,and for it to go on doing so for 10 years despite people winning appeals which challenged this point . I'm even more shocked by the way in which Southwark seems to have seen Charter's manipulation of it's admission policy as being beyond their remit ( concern even )and by Renatas's comment " Our view is that this aspect of the policy is a matter for the academy to determine as it is its own admission authority." So so long as the policy appears to be fair on paper the school can choose to make it unfair in practice ? I see that Southwark has an Admissions Forum - on Southwark's site it says the following about the forum The forum has a key role in ensuring the admissions system is fair, that it promotes social equity and does not disadvantage children. It also ensures that the admissions system is straightforward and easy for parents and carers to understand. Forums also monitor the local authority to ensure that we are complying with the schools admissions code. Clearly it hasn't managed to achieve the above and I wonder if it even still exists ,the last posted minutes were for a meeting in Feb 2011 . So it would seem that it will be up to parents to monitor and take action if they have concerns about admission policies and they way they are administered . Those involved in the Charter campaign may find their advice and experience in demand .

me too - would be good to narrow down the area though . edited to say - horrible thing for you to go through ,hope you're doing ok .

I'm still stunned at the retrospective removal of informed choice from secondary school admissions for this year. curmudgeon I agree with you . It's worth noting for those who didn't think they,d get in because the Charter hadn't in the past recognised this route from the Dog Kennel Hill side that the ajudicator recommends that late applications could/should be accepted . ( or that's my understanding ) . I honestly do agree with you but ,out of interest are there really that many " choices " ( ha ha ) for those who feel they now have less chance of being sucessful and have "wasted " an application that they would have applied elsewhere ? I'm just wondering where else they'd have tried ...somewhere out of borough ,Deptford Green ?

They could just be house flies coming out of hibernation because you've increased your heating due to cold snap . No need for talk of corpses ...please .

I'd like to know more about the role of Southwark in overseeing secondary school admissions . With all Southwark secondaries being their own admission authorities Southwark might take the easy route and back out all together ,effectively leaving it up to parents to monitor and persue good and fair ( honest even ) practice . Southwark's comment in the adjudicator's report that their experience was in straight line admission policies in primary school and that they couldn't comment on the technicalties of Charter's administration of their policy certainly sounds like they're distancing themselves . And there is now no longer any statutory requirement for LA's to have admission forums so Southwark are free to bow out all together .

And the letter from Southwark supporting the Charter's discredited method of working out shortest walking distance ?

James " it does seem strange that a letter of support from the administration was issued when the evidence was so clearly indicating Southwark Council shouldn't be supporting the status" the report only quotes from comments made by Southwark ,there is no mention of a letter supporting the status. Have I missed it or is it a letter you've seen elsewhere ? Can someone explain how radial distance works - sorry to be dense ! Guess we'd btter hope it's not "radial" as presumably this will be outside Southwark's experience and they'll be at a loss to know whether Charter are administrating the system fairly or not .

Reading the report I am shocked by the degree of autonomy that the school assumed . But this is the situation we have now - all secondary schools in Southwark are their own admissions authorities and this case clearly demonstrates what a strong position they are in to evade the regulations in place to ensure that they conform to the code of practice . ( don't even get me started on the yawning gap between the requirement to be clear and easily understood and Kingsdale's complex arrangement re scholarships ,lotteries ,banding and how they organise the waiting lists ) James seems to be stressing that Southwark have supported the Charter in the dubious administration of it's oversubscrition policy . As far as I can see from the report Southwark commented that they didn't administer any secondary school admissions but that for primary schools they used the "straight line " approach and that they didn't think Charter were in breach of the code . Presumably as the time when Southwark did control admissions to secondary schools receeds ever further into the past they will have even more reason to state as they did in this case that they " are not in a good position to comment on the technical aspects of the case ". I'm not really clear what Southwark should have done ,presumably there were actions open to them . But it's not just the current administration that haven't taken them - this refusal on the Charter's part to recognise a footpath has been going on for 11 years since the school opened . I have a friend who had to go to appeal in 2001 on exactly this issue and she was succesful . Southwark presumably should have taken action before . And I agree with other posters - this corrects the administration for this years intake but has indeed altered the circumstances for applicants to secondary schools this year after they've made their applications .

fox1 - well done on appealing ,it's a long and horrible process I know ,so good on you for perservering . Am glad ( and slightly amazed as IME having "right " on one's side doesn't always mean that one is succesful ) that the school have been told to abide by it's own over subscription rules . Wonder if they'll be as scrupulous at checking out applicants' supposed addresses ?

Huggers - yes that'll be the one ,I read only half of it and want the rest of it ( even thinking of buying hard copy ) for reference . Do you have a link ?

Mmm yes ,tricky . ( sorry tricky not correct/adequate adjective if you're a parent or child affected ) And presumably there may be children currently at other schools who were unsuccesful in gaining entry at yr 7 who would have got in if the school had been recognising shortest/safest walking distance . if they're on the waiting list will this decision give them priority ...