Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I know someone currently studying at Harris Academy in East Dulwich (the one opposite Peckham Rye park). His class has a large majority of black students from what I've heard 90 percent plus, with the odd (1 from what I understand) white student. I haven't confirmed the exact numbers, but from what I've heard so far the lack of diversity is quite shocking.


I have no reasons to believe that the teaching or administration is anything short of excellent, this is purely a question of; is the lack of diversity, in your opinion, going to have any positive/negative effects when it comes to growing up and engaging with people who are not black in the future ie lack of exposure to other races? Would like to hear any opinions on the matter really.

The student I know would ideally be spending time with people of all races, beliefs and environments in general equally. The student I know is not black himself.


I hope no one sees this post as 'touchy' or me trying to say one race is better than the other either directly or indirectly, this is not the case in the slightest. The crux of the whole post being, living in London as we do, is this lack of diversity going to be a problem for the students now or later in life?

Mmm, now I went to a school where the majority of parents of my fellow students had been born and lived their entire lives within a twenty mile radius of the school. I suspect that was far more limiting than the fact that we were all much the same colour.

You will never find an institution that holds a perfect mix and fashion/lifestyle changes can be just as significant as any cultural differences so whatever you experience in youth may be of no help in later life.

Touchy subject indeed. No doubt it will all kick-off with some inappropriate comment somewhere or other.


My personal opinion is that a lot of people would prefer a school which is reasonably reflective of the mix they experience in their day to day life, no more, no less. Which is pretty mixed, here in London - and all the better for it.


Many - (most, even?) of the local primaries are reflective of this mix.


Harris isn't. Not yet, anyway. I hope this will change.

I agree with Bob.


I think the ideal is a good social and ethnic mix in a school. A school that is all one thing is less than ideal but its not something I would be worried about.


People who tend to the only "fill in the blank" are very adaptable in my experience.


I am almost always the onlyor one of very few women in my industry. I don't even notice anymore much less feel uncomfortable with that.

My son attends the school, is white and has no problem with the diversity. He says in his year it's about 60\40 which is probably about the same as ED/Peckham/Nunhead combined area (not that he thinks it matters). It's true there has been very poor take up by local ED parents (we are in ED) and I would personally like to see this change, not for reasons of diversity but because I'd like it to be a local community school. My son is doing very well at the school and it works for him.

EDmummy,

When I've visited ths school it has always been more mixed that the original poster suggests. Eitherway they've always been smart and engaged boys.

Many of the pupils do come from outside the immediate area. My hunch is that with great GCSE results this will change and it will increasingly become more and more a local community school reflecting the diversity of the neighbouring areas.

My daughter left Kingsdale in 2010. When she joined the school was 85% black, 15% white.


She left school with black friends & white friends.


She then attended college with black friends & white friends.


She gets on well with everybody & has friends from all races & different cultures.


She thinks the same as I do.


Everybody is equal.

Great, James - close to the point I was making. This is my son's 3rd year there and has friends of every colour and creed - just like we, his family do.



James Barber Wrote:

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

> EDmummy,

> When I've visited ths school it has always been

> more mixed that the original poster suggests.

> Eitherway they've always been smart and engaged

> boys.

> Many of the pupils do come from outside the

> immediate area. My hunch is that with great GCSE

> results this will change and it will increasingly

> become more and more a local community school

> reflecting the diversity of the neighbouring

> areas.

I'm really surprised to hear those statistics MelonSmasher. I recently went on a tour of Harris Boys, along with a group of other Year 6 parents, and simply did not notice the ethnicity of the students - although I saw plenty of them going about their daily business. Is it really as dramatic a split as you suggest? I'm more inclined to believe son of EdMummy's analysis.


I've also been to Kingsdale and FH Boys recently, again the ethnic mix was virtually the last thing on my mind. What split would be acceptable to you, living as we do in South East London?

Alice- I was keeping it simple. It would of course be a similar issue if his class were 90 percent plus white, or had only one black student, I would be questioning the lack of diversity.


James Barber - it has not always been more mixed than I have suggested, don't be silly. I know for a fact that they're smart and engaged boys, I wasn't doubting this. a 60/40 split or whatever seems fairly decent and wouldn't be an obvious issue. As I mentioned, in this particular case its 90 percent plus.


Otta- This is strictly a school environment issue, obviously when the student I know is not in school he is engaging with who he wants and that means everyone.


Having attended Dulwich Hamlet myself not too long ago, I would say that Hamlet definitely had a representative mix of students and I have some great friends till this day as a result.

In any case, I have no issues with anyone of any race, neither does the student I know. These were just observations really.

Every one is the same colour underneath their skin,

my son is in year 11 of Harris boys east dulwich, his white and yet again i will say the same as others on here, his friends are all cultures,creeds,races and religions,why should colour make a difference,

my son has done and is doing really well at school,and is very happy at school.............

MelonSmasher

>

> James Barber - it has not always been more mixed

> than I have suggested, don't be silly. I know for

> a fact that they're smart and engaged boys, I

> wasn't doubting this. a 60/40 split or whatever

> seems fairly decent and wouldn't be an obvious

> issue. As I mentioned, in this particular case its

> 90 percent plus.

>

> Otta- This is strictly a school environment issue,

> obviously when the student I know is not in school

> he is engaging with who he wants and that means

> everyone.

>

> Having attended Dulwich Hamlet myself not too long

> ago, I would say that Hamlet definitely had a

> representative mix of students and I have some

> great friends till this day as a result.

> In any case, I have no issues with anyone of any

> race, neither does the student I know. These were

> just observations really.

What is the stats for Charter, Habs and Kingsdale with regards to ethnicity ? just so that we can compare in case it's a name issue (Harris) or the fact it's a single sex school etc thus not making it a popular choice for Dulwich parents ?

What difference does it make?


My eldest daughter went to the old Waverley school before it became a Harris academy. There were only 3 other white girls in her class.


My youngest went to Kingsdale & there was only one other white child in her class.


I grew up in a place that was 100% white but that didn't make me racist.


Children will choose their friends regardless of colour and do well at school regardless of diversity if they are brought up to believe that everyone is equal.

Well said Aquarius Moon. I had to push my son and his friend to come up with stats as they honestly don't see class mates colour.


aquarius moon Wrote:

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

> What difference does it make?

>

> My eldest daughter went to the old Waverley school

> before it became a Harris academy. There were only

> 3 other white girls in her class.

>

> My youngest went to Kingsdale & there was only one

> other white child in her class.

>

> I grew up in a place that was 100% white but that

> didn't make me racist.

>

> Children will choose their friends regardless of

> colour and do well at school regardless of

> diversity if they are brought up to believe that

> everyone is equal.

Aquarius, I have to agree with everything you've said above, maybe it doesn't make a difference after all.


This isn't a major issue or anything, just casual observations. Wasn't trying to start a katie hopkinsesque statement/drama motion or anything.

I think you will find it is all down to the luck of the draw when they split the year intake into classes. I was there with my grandson on the first day of year 7 intake in September and I can assure you that there was a very diverse mix of colour, shape and height! My Grandson was dwarfed on either side by both black and white boys and has made friends with a whole range of them.

Having watched them all troop out at close of day, on many occasions since that first day, I would say that the overall mix is no better nor no worse than any other in the borough and as long as the boys get along with each other, enjoy the school, get a good standard of Education and do well in their studies, what is there to worry about?

I agree with Bawdy Nan. I went to Waverley Girls on the Harris Girls site and most of my friends came from further afield ( Bermondsey, New Cross, Camberwell , Peckham and only one from Dulwich).

I do think it's because it's a single sex school so not as popular .

I wouldn't want my child going to a single school . I think it makes it difficult to relate to the opposite sex , at least it did for all of us .

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

    • Last week we had no water for over 24 hours and very little support from Thames Water when we called - had to fight for water to be delivered, even to priority homes. Strongly suggest you contact [email protected] as she was arranging a meeting with TW to discuss the abysmal service
    • 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.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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