Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It is going to be a squeeze! Hope the quality of the education is not affected by this and that the promise of additional funds over the next few years is not compromised should there be a change of council and/or govt. There must be reassurances but I am not sure they can be guaranteed from one financial year to another. I am hoping I am wrong.


Playgrounds are going to be a bit fun at drop off/pick up time!!

Of course that decision will not have been made simply on the fact that there were 80 chilren putting it down as first choice. No doubt Southwark have foeseen a problem in this area and have gone around their schools pleading to see who can accomodate more this year.

LordshipLaneMum Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So they had 80 applicants as first choice and have

> 80 places...that seems a bit perfect?



They will have 90 places, 3 classes of 30. Apparently there were 70 families chose it as 2nd or 3rd choice.

Princess Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Does this mean 80 more mum's and dad's sitting on

> my front wall every day at drop off and pick up

> times?!



30. Though the plan is to have a separate gate for reception in Jennings Rd.

Without condoning their behaviour in any way (I've seen it!), Princess, you did know there was a school across the road when you moved in;-)


I am still struggling to envisage where the extra 30 kids are going to be placed. There are two classrooms which have open access to a play area and as I understand it, access to open playground is a must for reception provision. Where will the 3rd classroom be?


Also, where will the children from the bulge class be placed once they move on up through the school? Will it only be a bulge for one year?

Surely once they have found one extra classroom, they have enough room for the bulge class as it moves up the school? And presumably the school would not have agreed to the bulge class unless it thought it had somewhere to put it?


I think the bigger issue is what this does to the sibling policy in future years - more children in this year must mean more siblings in future years.

Lewisham need to open 17 bulge classes across the Borough. It isn't really a question of the schools concerned agreeing to take an extra class; if they refuse, the local authority has the power to direct them to take an additional class. It's much better for the schools who are approached to take a bulge class to agree to this before the first round of offers goes out, then at least they get their extra class filled with children who have given that school as their first priority. If they refuse to take the extra class initially, by the time the local authority directs them to take a bulge class, that extra class could get filled up with chilren who would not necessarily be local to the school.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Round 3 Fixtures Saturday England v Ireland 14:10 Wales v Scotland 16:40 Sunday France v Italy 15:10
    • Another recommendation for Maurice Hinds! He installed a new handbasin in my small bathroom, and did a lovely job.  I would absolutely recommend Maurice for plumbing work.  He is very helpful, friendly and did a tidy and efficient job, and his work is reasonably priced. 
    • Sure. He is ideological driven on many things. He was the person that defended the blanket CPZ policy because he believed that 'if you asked most people in southwark if all parking should be paid for, most would say yes'. A completely unfounded belief not backed by any evidence. In the real world, that policy caused significant local electoral damage for some councillors. I personally see his disillusion with the Labour Party as one of his idealism vs the reality of governance. He will probably be much happier with the Greens.
    • Arguably, as regards local needs for free(er) flowing traffic and some acknowledgement of expressed wishes he hasn't been. The 'active travel' and particularly the cycling lobby seems to have got far more of his attention than others. In that aspect, at least he would seem to be far more likely to be happy amongst the avowedly private-car hating Greens. A perfectly reasonable stance, of course, but one which certainly doesn't qualify as 'arguing for local needs'. He hasn't, equally, been very obviously supportive of those, his direct constituents I believe, who have been less than enthusiastic about Gala.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...