Charter School admissions change

[Curmudgeon]

Renata Hamvas Wrote:

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

> To clarify a few things:

> Charter is not changing it's admission policy for

> 2012 entry. This would require consultation and

> wouldn't be implemented in the same year. The

> problem has been how Charter has been implementing

> its safe walking distance admissions criteria.

I've said it before and I'm loathe to repeat myself but it is DE FACTO changing it's admissions - because people, like Heber Jumble Queen, carefully examined all available information when making their choices in October - using the directgov schoolsfinder website, using historical information on who goes to which school up and down their street

those who are in the area beneficially affected by this adjudication may or may not have been aware of the appeal - so some may have factored this in to their choices and some may not - UNFAIR to retrospectively remove this choice

those who live in the areas detrimentally affected by this adjutication were not aware of this appeal / issue before and again it is retrospective alteration

safest walking distance is now to include a footpath which some people feel is not safe (see Albert's comments) - how were these people to know that the police have deemed a tree covered pathway as safe

All I can assume from reading the adjudication is that it is fair based on the support from ordnance survey and police but to implement it retrospectively affects people directly - when other schools have faced the same adjudication as I previously mentioned the decision was made to make the change in time for the following admissions cycle allowing all stakeholders access to the same information

[BB100]

murphy Wrote:

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

> The biggest beneficiary of the changes to the

> Charter school admissions policy, apart from the

> kids who can now get in, will be Harris Boys East

> Dulwich. Their criteria for entry is closest

> straight line distance. The largest catchment area

> for the school are the relatively wealthy parts of

> East Dulwich, who have to an extent avoided the

> school so far. If most people in East Dulwich

> decide to apply to Harris (as Kingsdale entry

> becomes more of a lottery, and those on the east

> side of Lordship Lane lose out in the changes to

> the Charter admissions process) then Harris will

> see their results rise.

>

> The end result could be in a few years that Harris

> becomes an exceptional school.

Great theory but Harris Boys ED is already on track as an exceptional school without any help from the chattering classes. They have nearly 40% on FSM, high SEN and 20% ESL but they are aiming for 100% 5 GCSE maths & english. See their Ofsted report for the inspector's comments on their predicted results.

[Curmudgeon]

I hope so but as it only currently goes up to year 8 (or is it 9) there's a long way to go

by the way the "chattering classes" are allowed to be concerned about the State Education system and where their children will be educated, by whom, and with whom.

[skyblue]

DuPlicate post

[skyblue]

Don't wory b100 the Real chatters go private and couldn't care less about this thread. There are people in east dulwich who really are normal.-despite all the hype. Im sitting here wishing Harris was co-ed and feeling cross about our country's rubbish admission process. When I was a kid we all went to the nearest comp on mass- no 'choice'. The only thing worse than no choice is the illusion of it.

[championofthehill]

I would agree with all the above posts that the secondary admissions process is a nightmare. Having been through a stressy nightmare ourselves - not allocated a school we were happy with - despite being very confident we were in the catchment for Charter as many children from our area go there, with a significant number walking right past our house (Curmudgeon). Only a minority of my daughter's friends were lucky enough (initially) to get school they wanted, and the atmosphere in the playground was grim, even the lucky ones suffering from survivors' guilt.

The message I would like to send out is that almost everyone eventually got something they were happy with. Be it as a result of an appeal, waiting list movement, going private or even taking a chance at something they thought wasn't great, but which turned out to be fine.

Hang on in there. And try not to pass the stress on to your children.

[Dorothy]

I remember being on a thread about secondary admissions with you last year Skyblue. Sad to see that choice (hollow laugh) in SE22 is still such a headache for so many parents.

Quite obviously Charter can do nothing but allocate places according to their own stated criteria and that is just tough luck on the considerable number of SE22 parents on the wrong side of LL who had no idea this was even an issue. Doesn't make JB's insensitive op any easier to swallow.

[BB100]

Curmudgeon Wrote:

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

> I hope so but as it only currently goes up to year

> 8 (or is it 9) there's a long way to go

>

> by the way the "chattering classes" are allowed to

> be concerned about the State Education system and

> where their children will be educated, by whom,

> and with whom.

Well in two years time remember you heard it here first. I do resent the suggestion that we need wealthy families for schools to be exceptional.

[skyblue]

Dorothy, Totally agree the truth is, as we have been going on about for over a year, is that there is no co-ed for kids east of Lordship Lane. That is a fact. I would like our local councillors at the very least to confirm this or tell us what the options are.

[EDmummy]

As far as I remember, Harris boys should have some kids sitting GCSEs this year. As someone that always knew we wouldn't get into Charter in the first round I'd never set my heart on it but do truly sympathise withou parents who assumed they would get in because of past decisions. The retrospectivity of this will be challenged probably with a 'custom and practice' defence but my assumption would be this would have to be done on a case by case basis. What would be fairer is if Charter and/or Southwark decided to honour the current applications based on the assumptions made by parents for 2012 intake. Legally this is a mess and there are no winners.

[Ole]

My son is years and years away from going to secondary school, but as we live in Champion Hill (Denmark Hill but just behind the estate) this thread caught my eye and I have been reading it out of curiosity. As we live so close to Charter I always assumed that local kids go to Charter so I was surprised to find out that mainly they are not and I am wondering what other secondary school are they allocated to instead? Apart from Sacred Heart, which I consider is quite a trek from here and much further away than Charter (and is a Catholic school I think?), I can't think of any other secondary schools in the 'area' that would not need a bus trip?

[Carbonara]

But the precedent has been set by appeals in the past.

If Charter were to honour the applications from those furthest away in favour of those now legally within catchment, can you see the parents who mounted and sustained what must have been a long and difficult campaign conceding that parents who second guessed the distance on years gone by should take precedence over their children?

Legally nothing has changed except that Charter are being told to implement their stated policy.

However, I would be very stressed and upset to find that what I thought was a reasonable chance of admission had been based on previous mis-application of the policy. It is Charter's past demeanor that has brought this about. It may be that most parents now cast into the depths of despair will actually get the place they want - fingers crossed for all.

[James Barber]

Hi Dorothy,

I'm sorry if you feel I should not have posted this important decision and started this thread.

I don't think the decision will make a big difference generally but clearly for some families it will make all the difference. I think it's best they know of this correction now than in letters about school offers much later.

The Charter School is close to the Lambeth border so parochially for East Dulwich I expect the decision to dissipate its impact across its large admissions footprint and only be felt at the margins that could never have been certain of admission.

NB. I'm told the council is closing down the Southwark Admissions Forum.

[intexasatthe moment]

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 ?

[FatherJack]

Intexasatthe moment......perhaps they have been forced to admit that in Southwark it's not fair, straightforward or easy for parents/carers to understand.....and as for "does not disadvantage children" ...pah!

Edited to say however I would love to know why they've given up......

[intexasatthe moment]

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 .

[heber jumble queen]

James - I don't think either Dorothy, or myself, were suggesting that you shouldn't have posted this thread.

However your jolly 'hoorah, what good news for everyone' tone didn't take into account that the reshifting of equity did mean that this will affect some people detrimentally - whether it was Champion Hill residents thinking that they should have put Charter down as they'd assumed they wouldn't get in - or those of us finding ourselves now just too east of LL now to get in after assuming we had a good chance.

As a councillor representing all local residents perhaps you could have shown a little more appreciation that this would be unsettling news to some of us - especially as we now have no option to revisit applications.

[Renata Hamvas]

Compulsory local admissions forums were scrapped last year by Michael Gove as part of the government's simplification of the admission's code.

In terms of those of you like heber jumble queen above, we won't know the effect of the adjudicator's ruling on last place offered distances until after the 1st March (less than 4 weeks to go). The people who may be affected are those who when they look at last year's figures are on the edge of the last place offered distance, which has been shrinking year on year. I am happy to try and help anyone, regardless of ward once the allocations come out on 1st March. Also to say that there is always movement on waiting lists and also after 1st March your child's name can be added to other schools you didn't apply to (a bit problematic with schools that set their own banding exams though).

Renata

[intexasatthe moment]

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 .

[Sallyc]

Please be aware that after places come out in March approximately 50 of those given Charter will actually not take the place as they will be going privately. Really, nobody should panic. The `catchment' area actually hasn't shrunk at all in fact I don't think if you take these places offered often between April and June into account.

[Carbonara]

er, Sally, every parent looking at secondary admissions knows that there is movement once all the acceptances and declined places get shuffled around, and many people will have made decisions based on whether the children in their road go to the school, knowing that they got places after March 1st. Of course the overall, ultimate catchment will have shrunk a bit - for all the children (rightfully, in my opinion) to gain a place on the correctly implemented route measurement there will be a child on the margins of the catchment who will not.

Everyone knows that nothing has ever been guaranteed, but it is indisputable that this has added an adverse factor to the basis on which some people thought they had a reasonable chance. Secondary admissions is an incredibly tense time for parents, this is bound to cause upset and dissappointment (if not despair!)to some, even as it brings hope and a well earned sense of relief to others.

[James Barber]

Double checking with Southwarks admissions manager - "I can confirm that Southwark's Admissions Forum is still fully active despite there no longer being a requirement for local authorities to have one."

My original source was wrong and I'm sorry for misleading anyone.

[intexasatthe moment]

Thanks for clearing that up James .

[Curmudgeon]

Renata Hamvas Wrote:

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

> In terms of those of you like heber jumble queen

> above, we won't know the effect of the

> adjudicator's ruling on last place offered

> distances until after the 1st March (less than 4

> weeks to go). The people who may be affected are

> those who when they look at last year's figures

> are on the edge of the last place offered

> distance, which has been shrinking year on year. >

Hi Renata

I truly would like to understand this - if people who were 2.1km away are now 1.4km away (I read somewhere on this thread that this footpath shaves 700m off the previously calculated 'safest walking' distance) then surely those who are further than 1.4km away - say 1.5 to 1.7km and who were well within any boundaries of first allocation from any year over the past decade or so will be detrimentally affected. Charter stated this year that the furthest distance offered was 2000metres last year. What is this 'edge' of which you speak?

Do you mean that those who live on roads where children have been going to Charter on first allocation for years and yet are further than 1.4km away are now 'boundary placements'? This is not what families have believed for over a decade.

Or am I totally and utterly missing something?

Once again I would like to stress that it is the retrospective removal of choice for all families involved that is under discussion and not the fairness of the adjudication.

[squirrelmc]

Curmudgeon you have misunderstood. I will try to explain it the best I can.

Let's say that last year the pupil who lived furthest away from the school and was offered a place on first allocation was living 2.1km away (let's call him Derek). Last year then, people who are on the "edge" are those living 2km and 2.2km away from the school i.e. people living this distance from the school could easily have been offered a place or not offered a place... it just depended on the number of children who were slightly closer to the school than them that applied.

People "living on the edge" will never know if they are bound to get a place or not, because it depends entirely on statistics for that years applications i.e. the number of year 6 pupils living between them and the school who applied for a place at the school. So if on the 30th October (the day before the secondary school application forms have to be in) a family of four year 6 children moved in next door to Derek and all applied for a place at the school, Derek would not have got his place because these children are nearer (and yes, it really is down to house-by-house on "the egde").

So just because children on your road go to Charter, does not mean that your child will get a place IF YOU ARE ON THE EDGE OF THE ALLOWABLE DISTANCE.

To make things even more unstable and changeable from year to year, the "edge" shifts and no-one can predict where it will be. Again, it depends entirely on statistics... how many year 6 children nearer to the school than you applied. No-one can ever know this in advance, not even the school and only 180 will get a place.

The adjudication has found that the school was not measuring the home to school distances correctly for an area of children. The school was adding uo to 700m onto their distances which meant they were "beyond the edge" even though they lived much closer to the school than people offered places (derek).

You are confusing this 700m with the "edge". This 700m is not shaved off the edge and therefore shrinking it. It is shaved off an individual's distance measurement, and only those individuals who were in the affected area. So if Derek last year got in and he lived 2.1km away, then this year the edge may stay at 2.1 km even with the adjudication... it just depends on how many people nearer to the school applied.

It's a statistical lottery that no-one living on the "edge" of past years' maximum distance can predict. If 170 year 6 children move in opposite the school and apply for a place then yes the edge will shrink dramatically. However, allowing children on the affected estates the right to be fairly measured will in reality have very little effect for most people. It may mean that a couple of children on the "edge" don't get offered a place, but then that was always the case.

And, by the way, the amount of year 6 children living on these estates and surrounding roads is pretty small.