Who's freaking our about school admissions?

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

The French education system doesn't allow for such things as school choices - unless someone wants religion added in, and then they can pay for it. Seems to do rather well for their children too, going by their attainment by adulthood, too.


Mind you, I lived on a sink estate. Don't ever remember dodging flying fishfingers, but my girls went to the nearest school - which happened to be off the estate. Had I lived the other side of the place, it would have been the one on the estate.

They seem to have managed rather well.

elvis86

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

The French education system doesn't allow for such things as school choices - unless someone wants religion added in, and then they can pay for it. Seems to do rather well for their children too, going by their attainment by adulthood, too.

Totally agree. Religion has no place in state-funded education.

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

Mind you, I lived on a sink estate. Don't ever remember dodging flying fishfingers, but my girls went to the nearest school - which happened to be off the estate. Had I lived the other side of the place, it would have been the one on the estate.

They seem to have managed rather well.

I think the implication is that you throw them, your kids dodge them..;)

dirtysexymonkey

elvis86 wrote: »

I can't argue with some of your points, it's a minefield. I guess it's maybe 2 seperate issues?

Choice. Where "choice" allows parents a choice of X number of schools, with them applying for the one(s) that they think is/are better, I don't agree with it. I can't see how it's productive, as demand will inevitably outstrip supply when it comes to the schools that are deemed to be the best.

To me, choice like that only works when you're paying for something. If there are 3 private schools in a town, then by all means they should compete for students (ie customers), as with any business. But where a service is state-funded, it doesn't seem fair to me to give people a choice like that. As taxpayers we all have a right to expect a certain level of service, and there's no reason why you should have to (or for that matter, be able to) "shop around".

The second (and maybe seperate) issue is that of some schools having a catchment area full of middle-class parents, whilst others serve council estates full of disinterested parents. You're correct in saying that this wouldn't be solved if school places were strictly allocated by address (ie those living in Area A attend School A, those in Area B attend School . Whilst certainly an issue that we should address, this is way more far-reaching than schools, and involves lots of issues around parenting, healthcare, the benefits system etc.

I guess what I'm saying is that whilst there will always be more and less affluent areas, and whilst people will always have the "choice" of paying more to live amongst people of a higher class (and therefore allow your kids to attend school with these people's children), I can't see the point in allowing people to choose between 2 or 3 schools, or in allocating any resources to this, be it through facilitating the applications process or through dealing with disputes and appeals.

The time and money would be better spent trying to foster an environment where the occurence of certain schools being condemnded/demonised is less common, and there is more of a level playing field.

but they are paying for it through taxation.

once again it is the people that improve a school so there will always be differences. if a pta is going to spend time helping the school in order to help their children then why should that be penalised?

people want the best for their children, but only some are willing to put the effort in to ensure they get it.

there is never going to be a level playing field, the best teachers will go to the best schools and the best pupils will follow. thats the way of the world.

there is definitely an argument for ensuring that there is a basic standard of education that should be met.

the days of a strict curriculum that should be followed are long gone. the basics should be covered but after that it should be up to the school and parents should be able to choose which school to put their children into, one way or another.

schools should be teaching advanced it, coding and the like, foreign languages from an early age, mainly a mix of european and asian ones, home economics should be put back into the classroom, as should practical skills for adulthood. giving schools the ability to teach these skills is the best way to prepare kids for the future. unfortunately not everyone agrees and some treat school as daycare and others think kids should be taught latin instead. the worlds changed, and the state education system needs to adapt. that begins with a few decent schools taking the lead. it is not something that can be adequately legislated for.