Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'm not sure I can get my head round it either .....but it does seem that if you take the numbers of places offered to external applicants ( ie total number less places going to primary school transfers ) the band sizes are almost equal .


18 , 18 , 17 ,19 ,17 ,20 ,19 ,19 ,19 ,


And yes it does look like a large nos transferring from the primary school are in the higher bands - 15 in band 1 and 10 in band 2 .

And yes it does look like a large nos transferring from the primary school are in the higher bands - 15 in band 1 and 10 in band 2 .


That's interesting - so students who transfer from the linked primary is not included in the fair banding - that doesn't seem that fair to me. Given that this is the trend - to have primaries attached to secondaries (Harris Peckham is another like this) is it a loop hole that needs to be looked at?

I'm not sure what to think about this .


I don't like the idea of all through schools - just feel that kids sometimes need a fresh start and that their options to go elsewhere will be diminishing with this trend . Also feels a bit like indoctrination - Pimlico Academy that I'm a little familar with and follow are very keen on a particular American curriculum following ED Hirsch and they start young with them at primary . Reminds me of that Jesuit thing - give me a boy at 7 ..... .Except now it's a child at 4 or 5 .http://www.theguardian.com/education/2012/oct/15/hirsch-core-knowledge-curriculum-review


I digress . Could not including the primary transfer pupils in the banded places available be fairer ? Means all external candidates are competing on a level playing field ? But obvioulsly limits amount of places available and presumably shifts the whole " buying into the area " tactic down to primary school level .


What a nightmare . What a mistake that we've gone down this route of Academys ,Free Schools and not put the money poured into them to better use in improving LA ( and in my dream world inner london authority ) schools .

Hi stateeducation,

I initiated a campaign for a new East Dulwich secondary school during 2013. With 20 local parents we compared The Charter School offering with Haberdashers' Aske's offering. We considered the latter to be a better offering for East Dulwich. I'm sorry this has made The charter School so unhappy that they weren't willing to accept our decision to go with Haberdashers' and have decided to launch their own campaign. It complicates things for both groups and will involve at least one party incurring significant expense with nothing to show for it.


Both campaigns are reliant on the Right to Contest for 2/3rd of the Dulwich hospital site being successful. I submitted on behalf of the campaign for a new ED secondary school I initiated.


Hi ITATM, bornagain,

Their is no proposal for our new secondary school to be anything other than a secondary school. It would be banding and within banding distance.

Oh my can't believe I agree with your post texas..but I agree its a nightmare!!!


Welcome back state we have missed your cheery posts


I'm not sure I agree with feeder primary's either and will let HABS know this, I expect they have a good reason for it...

What a nightmare . What a mistake that we've gone down this route of Academys ,Free Schools and not put the money poured into them to better use in improving LA ( and in my dream world inner london authority ) schools .


Spot on as usual, intexas ;)

Hi Mariabab,

Lewisham Council asked them to take on a failing primary school and open primary schools. The space available for new primary school was on their existing secondary school sites.


Generally the Southwark secondary school heads I've met have issues with the kids they receive into their secondary schools. Hence why some have tried exerting more control by running feeder primary schools.


Habderdahsers' were interesting. They explained they'd seen dramatic improvement in primary school SAT scores but stable scores in non verbal reasoning scores used for banding.

" They explained they'd seen dramatic improvement in primary school SAT scores but stable scores in non verbal reasoning scores used for banding. "


So no change in results of non verbal tests used to place pupils in bands ? But pupils transferring from the feeder primary school gain 25 out of 61 places in the top 2 bands . Even though their success rate in the banding tests remain stable ?

'Habderdahsers' were interesting. They explained they'd seen dramatic improvement in primary school SAT scores but stable scores in non verbal reasoning scores used for banding.'


Isn't that because you can coach for SATs but not for non verbal reasoning? I'm assuming that banding tests will be non-verbal reasoning.


I understand that HA school if it happens in ED will have a different admissions model to Hatcham but still I'm not totally comfortable that the admissions outcome in their flagship school is not totally transparent.


ETA notice there is another thread advertising an all-through school for Peckham and Nunhead. This will increasingly put pressure on parents to find the 'right' school at 4/5yrs, what a nightmare! For all sorts of reasons I'm totally against all-through schools.

What I mean is that some schools spend much of Yr 6 teaching to perform well for the SATs test (eg lots of test for practice).


Once they get to secondary, these primary SATs results are not considered important (in fact misleading) as you can't compare like with like across all the feeder primary schools. As far as I know secondary schools all do their own CATs test early in year 7 to set their own benchmark for their students future assessment.


edited for typos

yes, bornagain, that makes sense. The year 6 sats things are pretty awful - quite a lot of weeping going on despite the school doing pretty well, I think, at trying to make it feel ok and spending a lot of time doing other, lovely things. My daughter had a huge outburst of fury about them - roaring about why she had to do them and what was the point and how it made her feel awful (and she's someone who's doing well).

Mr Barber and the steering group deserve credit for raising the issue around the need for a new ED school.


It seems strange then around this groups desire to publicly criticise Charter. It seems equally strange that some of the more vocal East Dulwich politicians do not seem to fully support their local schools, in more ways than one.

I know this point has already been made but James I think you need to change the title of this thread. With every gratitude for the time and enthusiasm from yourself and the steering committee you can't be certain that the many people who signed up to support your efforts to get a new ED secondary are actually in favour of Haberdashers - speaking for myself but I'm sure I'm not alone, I am in favour of the idea of a good co-ed non-faith secondary and still have an open mind on provider.

The thing is edanna is that "we" don't get to choose which school gets to set up the new free school or indeed, if any application will be accepted. That's a decision for the Dept Ed. The steering group selected HA as their choice after considering the options and will be working with them - hence the title of the thread, I suppose.


I've got no idea what the criteria are for the Dept Ed when deciding between rival bids.

James Barber Wrote:

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

>

> The DfE may be influenced to some degree by the

> qunatity of support for a bid when two bids are

> compared.


James, I read with interest your assertion above. I had not realised that quantity of support for a bid may be taken into account in the eventual decision by the DofE between two proposed providers.


In light of this, if my vote of support is counted for one school bid over the other, then I unfortunately need to withdraw my support for the Haberdasher Aske's Federation school, as my preference between the two is for a new Charter school.


Please can you therefore amend the total in the subject header of this thread (from 551 down to 550), that I notice is constantly updated as posts are added. I presume you do this?


I will email you privately with my details for my name to be removed from your supporter database.


Thank you.

Hi 281102,

Yes, the DfE may be influenced. Not sure 'may' is an assertion. Either way I will amend when I receive your email 281102. I'll amend the score taking into account the latest supporters.


Hi Scruffy Mummy,

Not quite up to the DfE yet. Applications have to be made. The site needs to be secured.


Hi bawdy-nan,

Well, yes and no. The DfE can only decide based on bids received. So if we weren't submitting the bids then the DfE would not get to decide. So we are all a critical part of this process. Whatever happen we need a new secondary school.


Hi edanna,

I've always been clear that I would seek support and if sufficient support was present then find a provider. I've stated repeatedly that if anyone doesn't think the provider we were going to choose was for them then to let me know and I'd log their withdrawal of support.

I could have taken a different approach as we did when no provider except Harris Federation were interested in supporting a free primary school bid before the support materialised. Once we had clear support providers who had refused were suddenly interested. But as we have sufficient Harris secondary schools already I took this riskier approach.


Hi stateeducation,

I'm sorry for any negativity about The Charter School. I regret this. Much has been in response to suggestions we hadn't considered their desire to be our provider fully, etc. We spent a lot of time and in my case holiday days making sure we did.

Hi ITATM,

What do you mean the highest two bands?

Band 1 is the lowest ability band.




intexasatthe moment Wrote:

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

> " They explained they'd seen dramatic improvement

> in primary school SAT scores but stable scores in

> non verbal reasoning scores used for banding. "

>

> So no change in results of non verbal tests used

> to place pupils in bands ? But pupils transferring

> from the feeder primary school gain 25 out of 61

> places in the top 2 bands . Even though their

> success rate in the banding tests remain stable ?

Posted this on the other thread, so in the interests of fairness...


What I find really sad (and more than a little bit childish) is the putting down of Haberdashers / Charter by the supporters of either.


As most reasonable people have stated in the last couple of weeks, both are capable of opening a new school, and a new school is what the area needs.


Support your chosen side, fine. But don't try slinging mud at the other one because it basically makes you look like you belong at the new school in year 7.

mariababe Wrote:

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

> I'm sorry sillywoman but that doesn't make any

> sense (plus I hate the term "I have heard")

>

> Anyway if they are creaming the top 10% from band

> 9 (lowest scores) how does that mean they are

> taking the highest abled child??

>

> No sense at all and definitely not sneaky


I'm sorry you don't like the way I speak Mariababe, I have 'heard' is a common phrase in the english language and it means exactly what it says. I've 'heard' it - not read or seen - so I was asking whether anyone has any concrete evidence that this is or isn't the case. In that context I believe 'I have heard' is entirely appropriate. Sorry that you hate it.


I'm not sure which part of my enquiry doesn't make sense to you so can't answer you properly, but I'll do my best. It makes a difference because: if it were true that haberdashers practiced creaming then they would be taking the most academically inclined in each banding across their intake population, therefore overall getting the children in each band who would be likeliest to get the best academic results. If a school that did this (lets call it school a) ) were to be physically placed next to, or in the immediate vicinity of, a school whose intake was purely based on distance (lets call it school b) ) then there would be a high risk that the academic kids in each band would go to school a), leaving the less academically inclined kids in each band to got o school b). School a) is likelier to get higher academic results and so, over time school b)'s results might be lower and so school a) would become more popular, school b) less so and could be perceived as less successful.


As someone who fought hard 15 years ago to get a good, co-ed, non faith, community comprehensive with a fair, distance based selection process for my children to attend, I would be greatly saddened to see this happen in my community and to the great community comprehensive we have here. The Charter has been a huge success. I would like to see the educational opportunities they offer to everyone living in their community offered to more of those in East Dulwich. I like fairness.

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

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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