Possible primary school appeal

poet123

bestpud wrote: »

...............................

That comment was not meant to indicate that the debate was a battle,merely that I had responded in kind the the poster,and that if she did not like my tone she should look to her own to see why I had gone down that route.

However, as the poster in question has not commented further on
this issue I fail to see why you felt the need to rake over it.

It would seem from your comments that your argument is not gaining a place in a school out of catchment,this is certainly not exclusive to faith schools. Gaining a place at any good school is unlikely if you are in that position.

Indeed, there was an article in the Sunday Times yesterday about this very point, and faith schools were mentioned only in passing, and then to illustrate my point that whilst faith is a criteria it is not the only one used.

In the example given a faith school had 90 places, the first criteria (as with all schools, by law)was children in public care,followed by special needs,50 were allocated to those of the faith,the rest were open to allcomers in the catchment area.

Ditto house prices. Any area with good schools is going to have higher house prices.

The issue of faith is irrelevant unless you are saying all good schools are faith schools? Which is a sweeping generalisation.

The issue which the Sunday Times outlined was the way middle class parents get around the system and gain places for their kids to the detriment of the kids of less well educated parents.

For example by appealing if a child out of catchment did not gain a place. The upshot of this has been for some LEA's to adopt a lottery system for places,meaning parents then have absolutely no say in the school their child is allocated to.

Therefore those parents who have rocked the boat for their own selfish ends(closeness to work,grandparents,friends etc were cited as reasons)have pushed the LEA's to take this step. Is that progress?

it won't affect me,as my child will go to the school we have chosen in our catchment area,but again it supports the other arguments (which were deemed irrelevant by some)that all the factors need to be considered before denouncing something as unfair.

Will those who stated selection was unfair in faith schools be happier with no choice at all? only if they were paying/prepared to pay for private education would be my guess.

That link is only proof it is required in that area not accross the board. I know the school my son is at and the school he will be attending have no such burden of proof. However I am speaking mainly for RC schools,I do believe C of E schools may be stricter,although I know of several in this area who also do not need the proof you mention.

With regard to transport from out of catchment..having the facility there does not show that it is used, or specifically by how many.

Also conversations/details given to you by a 3rd party are actually "hearsay"you cannot know how much of the truth has been passed on or what has been left out. See google definition." a mixture of gossip and truth from a 3rd party"

bestpud

poet123 wrote: »

However, as the poster in question has not commented further on
this issue I fail to see why you felt the need to rake over it.

Because I feel you made comments about me which are personal.

It would seem from your comments that your argument is not gaining a place in a school out of catchment,this is certainly not exclusive to faith schools. Gaining a place at any good school is unlikely if you are in that position.

No, that is NOT my argument at all. My argument is quite clear I thought! I simply feel it is wrong that faith schools are all but state funded and yet are allowed to select their pupils. That has nothing to do with catchments as pupils in catchment get a place anyway. It is about non catchment children being selected by faith rather than distance from the school. I don't know how I can make that any clearer.

Indeed, there was an article in the Sunday Times yesterday about this very point, and faith schools were mentioned only in passing, and then to illustrate my point that whilst faith is a criteria it is not the only one used.

In the example given a faith school had 90 places, the first criteria (as with all schools, by law)was children in public care,followed by special needs,50 were allocated to those of the faith,the rest were open to allcomers in the catchment area.

Yes, but bigger schools do take from OUTSIDE the catchment - that example does not. Every child in the catchment should be allowed a place anyway, irregardless of faith as faith is not a relevent selector in todays society imo. That is the very point I am arguing. Does the article say what would happen if only 3 children in the catchment were faith places and 80 were not? Would they say only 40 non faith children could go to their local school while 47 faith pupils came from outside the catchment?

Ditto house prices. Any area with good schools is going to have higher house prices.

Yes, that is my point - faith schools are better schools in the vast majority of cases. Have you not said that yourself on this thread? - I may be wrong on that one as I haven't checked!

The issue of faith is irrelevant unless you are saying all good schools are faith schools? Which is a sweeping generalisation.

I think that is well known isn't it? Is that not why the govt are pushing for more faith schools and asking them to join with failing schools to share their techniques?

The issue which the Sunday Times outlined was the way middle class parents get around the system and gain places for their kids to the detriment of the kids of less well educated parents.

Yes, but what has this got to do with selection by faith? Unless these parents are going to church to get their child a place - and people do that you know!

For example by appealing if a child out of catchment did not gain a place. The upshot of this has been for some LEA's to adopt a lottery system for places,meaning parents then have absolutely no say in the school their child is allocated to.

Therefore those parents who have rocked the boat for their own selfish ends(closeness to work,grandparents,friends etc were cited as reasons)have pushed the LEA's to take this step. Is that progress?

Well, there are pros and cons to this system I guess - but that is a whole new area and we are diverting again if we go down that route.

It does not take away the fact that selection by faith is not relevant in today's society.

it won't affect me,as my child will go to the school we have chosen in our catchment area,but again it supports the other arguments (which were deemed irrelevant by some)that all the factors need to be considered before denouncing something as unfair.

I believe it is fair that your child will goto your catchment school. I would not say it was right that he/she could go to0 that school if you lived outside the catchment area IF and ONLY IF you attend church regularly. That is different altogether as your child would then be given a place based purely on your faith, which is wrong imo.

Will those who stated selection was unfair in faith schools be happier with no choice at all? only if they were paying/prepared to pay for private education would be my guess.

I think it is wrong to have selective state education, yes. But if we are going to have it, then selection by ability is an altogether more relevant than selection by faith.

I can't speak for others though.

That link is only proof it is required in that area not accross the board. I know the school my son is at and the school he will be attending have no such burden of proof. However I am speaking mainly for RC schools,I do believe C of E schools may be stricter,although I know of several in this area who also do not need the proof you mention.

One of those school is an RC one and the criteria is even stricter for that one as it is heavily oversubscribed. Hence the separate application form. They have control over their admissions which is wrong for a state school, imo.

I never did say it was across the board. I have accepted from the start that your school does not ask for this info. You then said I was merely stating heresy whereas your claims are correct, so I have provided the evidence to back my 'heresay'. I have not questioned your 'facts' at all, only stated it is one school and things are not done like that in my area.

With regard to transport from out of catchment..having the facility there does not show that it is used, or specifically by how many.

Does that mean you require the further links I said I could find demonstrating the level of usage? :rolleyes:

I will have a look for the transport protests now. Is there anything else you'd like me to back up while I am there? I don't want to trawl through govt stats though as they will just be manipulated.

bestpud

poet123 wrote: »

Also conversations/details given to you by a 3rd party are actually "hearsay"you cannot know how much of the truth has been passed on or what has been left out. See google definition." a mixture of gossip and truth from a 3rd party"

Just noticed the edited bit.

Ok, scrub the bit about my sil, although I know it to be true.

The admissions criteria is clearly correct as you have read it yourself. So can we count that? :rolleyes:

As for my friend - well I know where she lives and I know she attends church, and I know her children were given church place because the vicar supported her application. Further, I know they also travel on the council provided transport. If you are going to question my word on that then you really need to start providing hard evidence to support your claims, don't you? :rolleyes:

bestpud

poet123 wrote: »

With regard to transport from out of catchment..having the facility there does not show that it is used, or specifically by how many.

....................

poet123

Which comments do you take exception to?

Which comments do you require proof of?


You are naive if you think that all kids in catchment get places at popular oversubscribed schools. If we are oversubscribed we use a PC prog which charts the children who live nearest to school. They are the ones who get the places.

I did not say that only faith schools were good schools that would be very presumptuous of me.

I do accept that some parents pretend to practice for a prescribed period to gain admission,this is why schools in this area do not ask for proof....if you are determined to get the proof there are always ways to do it.

I have personal knowledge of these issue in this area,you have knowledge acquired via your friend and SIL, that is hearsay,regardless of whether you accept that or not.

Selection on the basis of faith may be distasteful to you, but there is no question it works. Perhaps instead of railing against it you and others who oppose it should direct your energies to improving substandard non faith schools(of which you seem to believe there are many).

Personally I think you are doing a disservice to many non faith schools who get excellent results. I would say (as I said before)that faith schools have the edge (in my personal experience asa lecturer in a FE College) in the behaviour and demeanour spheres. I can only speculate why this should be.

I don't think we will ever agree on the question of whether faith schools should select in part on the basis of faith. However it is lawful and has been fully debated by those in power,that is democracy.

Your link clearly illustrates my last point....Thank you

bestpud

poet123 wrote: »

However, as the poster in question has not commented further on
this issue I fail to see why you felt the need to rake over it.

Because I feel you made comments about me which are personal.

It would seem from your comments that your argument is not gaining a place in a school out of catchment,this is certainly not exclusive to faith schools. Gaining a place at any good school is unlikely if you are in that position.

No, that is NOT my argument at all. My argument is quite clear I thought! I simply feel it is wrong that faith schools are all but state funded and yet are allowed to select their pupils. That has nothing to do with catchments as pupils in catchment get a place anyway. It is about non catchment children being selected by faith rather than distance from the school. I don't know how I can make that any clearer.

Indeed, there was an article in the Sunday Times yesterday about this very point, and faith schools were mentioned only in passing, and then to illustrate my point that whilst faith is a criteria it is not the only one used.

In the example given a faith school had 90 places, the first criteria (as with all schools, by law)was children in public care,followed by special needs,50 were allocated to those of the faith,the rest were open to allcomers in the catchment area.

Yes, but bigger schools do take from OUTSIDE the catchment - that example does not. Every child in the catchment should be allowed a place anyway, irregardless of faith as faith is not a relevent selector in todays society imo. That is the very point I am arguing. Does the article say what would happen if only 3 children in the catchment were faith places and 80 were not? Would they say only 40 non faith children could go to their local school while 47 faith pupils came from outside the catchment?

Ditto house prices. Any area with good schools is going to have higher house prices.

Yes, that is my point - faith schools are better schools in the vast majority of cases. Have you not said that yourself on this thread? - I may be wrong on that one as I haven't checked!

The issue of faith is irrelevant unless you are saying all good schools are faith schools? Which is a sweeping generalisation.

I think that is well known isn't it? Is that not why the govt are pushing for more faith schools and asking them to join with failing schools to share their techniques?

The issue which the Sunday Times outlined was the way middle class parents get around the system and gain places for their kids to the detriment of the kids of less well educated parents.

Yes, but what has this got to do with selection by faith? Unless these parents are going to church to get their child a place - and people do that you know!

For example by appealing if a child out of catchment did not gain a place. The upshot of this has been for some LEA's to adopt a lottery system for places,meaning parents then have absolutely no say in the school their child is allocated to.

Therefore those parents who have rocked the boat for their own selfish ends(closeness to work,grandparents,friends etc were cited as reasons)have pushed the LEA's to take this step. Is that progress?

Well, there are pros and cons to this system I guess - but that is a whole new area and we are diverting again if we go down that route.

It does not take away the fact that selection by faith is not relevant in today's society.

it won't affect me,as my child will go to the school we have chosen in our catchment area,but again it supports the other arguments (which were deemed irrelevant by some)that all the factors need to be considered before denouncing something as unfair.

I believe it is fair that your child will goto your catchment school. I would not say it was right that he/she could go to0 that school if you lived outside the catchment area IF and ONLY IF you attend church regularly. That is different altogether as your child would then be given a place based purely on your faith, which is wrong imo.

Will those who stated selection was unfair in faith schools be happier with no choice at all? only if they were paying/prepared to pay for private education would be my guess.

I think it is wrong to have selective state education, yes. But if we are going to have it, then selection by ability is an altogether more relevant than selection by faith.

I can't speak for others though.

That link is only proof it is required in that area not accross the board. I know the school my son is at and the school he will be attending have no such burden of proof. However I am speaking mainly for RC schools,I do believe C of E schools may be stricter,although I know of several in this area who also do not need the proof you mention.

One of those school is an RC one and the criteria is even stricter for that one as it is heavily oversubscribed. Hence the separate application form. They have control over their admissions which is wrong for a state school, imo.

I never did say it was across the board. I have accepted from the start that your school does not ask for this info. You then said I was merely stating heresy whereas your claims are correct, so I have provided the evidence to back my 'heresay'. I have not questioned your 'facts' at all, only stated it is one school and things are not done like that in my area.

With regard to transport from out of catchment..having the facility there does not show that it is used, or specifically by how many.

Does that mean you require the further links I said I could find demonstrating the level of usage? :rolleyes:

I will have a look for the transport protests now. Is there anything else you'd like me to back up while I am there? I don't want to trawl through govt stats though as they will just be manipulated.

aytch

Not sure its a good idea to post on this thread, but as the head teacher at a Church of England faith school, and representative on my Local Authority admissions forum I thought I might be able to add factual information re admissions.

Initially faith schools were originally set up, run and funded by the church and as such come with non - negotiable trust deeds, these deeds (written often hundred of years ago) set in stone how these schools are populated - and differ from parish to parish. The deeds are legal documents and cannot be adapted.

In essence faith schools are selective, but this came about because when local authorities had too many children and not enough schools they asked the church if excess spaces in faith schools could be allocated to non faith children. This was agreed by the church providing faith children had first priority. This happened with the agreement of funding from the LA - hence current set up.

All current faith schools are their own admissions authority, it is a legal requirement that SEN and children looked after get preference above faith, then in my faith school, those on low income get preference because the trust deeds say the church set up the school for the poor of the parish. After that the school / church decides order of preference.

I have a working knowledge of admission numbers (in my county) to faith schools and it is rare to get 30% of intake who are in the family of active church members. The majority are non faith.

Finally, funding, the day to day running of faith schools is fully funded by the local authority, as the buildings belong to the church they are deemed the landlords and have to pay for the upkeep of the school buildings, repairs etc.

I hope this does not inflame any debate, just information to try and assist.

I loved being at school so much I am still there at age 47!

I hope the original OP has luck, if you would like to PM me for a chat re your issue I would be very happy to talk to you - I do deal with a lot of appeals. Infact will PM you myself, incase you lost the will to live reading this thread :beer:

bestpud

poet123 wrote: »

Which comments do you take exception to?

If you mean which did I find personal then the ones stating I was only speaking from heresay (I have provided an official link, even if you do dispute my word) and the one saying I have a bee in my bonnet.

Which comments do you require proof of?

I don't - that is the point. I have accepted your word but you seem bent on questioning my word even though I have provided evidence.

I have scrubbed my sil's experience but I do know (every bit as well as you know there are several other schools like yours) that my friend is in that very situation. Plus, you talk a lot about personal experience - what point are you trying to make. Is it not clear from the link that faith schools require evidence IN MY AREA and there are many children being bused across the county every day? Why are you still questioning two experiences I have stated when the hard evidence is in front of you?

My point was that I HAVE backed up my claims (heresay or not) - you haven't backed up yours and yet it is YOU QUESTIONING THE VALIDITY OF MY CLAIMS! Do you see what I mean now or would you like me to try again?


You are naive if you think that all kids in catchment get places at popular oversubscribed schools. If we are oversubscribed we use a PC prog which charts the children who live nearest to school. They are the ones who get the places.

Good, that is exactly how it should be done - by distance from the school, not faith!

The church schools in my area are always oversubscribed and yet non catchment children are selected by faith. Note I said IN MY AREA - lets not start that one again!

I did not say that only faith schools were good schools that would be very presumptuous of me.

Neither did I.

I do accept that some parents pretend to practice for a prescribed period to gain admission,this is why schools in this area do not ask for proof....if you are determined to get the proof there are always ways to do it.

If they are determined to convince you of their 'beliefs' then they will do that too won't they?

I have personal knowledge of these issue in this area,you have knowledge acquired via your friend and SIL, that is hearsay,regardless of whether you accept that or not.

Well, I have shown you the admissions criteria, which I myself have read fully. How on earth is that heresay? Like I said, you are arguing the toss about two things I have said when the evidence is in front of you and me. Why are you doing that?

You keep telling me you have personal experience but how exactly is that supporting your argument that my points are exaggerated and ill conceived?

Selection on the basis of faith may be distasteful to you, but there is no question it works. Perhaps instead of railing against it you and others who oppose it should direct your energies to improving substandard non faith schools(of which you seem to believe there are many).

Works for who?

Personally I think you are doing a disservice to many non faith schools who get excellent results. I would say (as I said before)that faith schools have the edge (in my personal experience asa lecturer in a FE College) in the behaviour and demeanour spheres. I can only speculate why this should be.

Well, I imagine it is because they select the pupils they want? ie the ones from higher socio-economic backgrounds?

I don't think we will ever agree on the question of whether faith schools should select in part on the basis of faith. However it is lawful and has been fully debated by those in power,that is democracy.

Hmmm, times change though don't they and that is the crux of my point really - are faith schools as relevant in contemporary society as they may have been in the past? I believe not.

Your link clearly illustrates my last point....Thank you

..............................

bestpud

Aytch - thanks, that explains the regional difference between myself and poet then!

As a matter of interest (although you may choose not to respond!), how would you account for the 'higher achievement' of many faith schools?

conradmum

Where I used to live the selection criteria for our local faith school were (in order):

1) Evidence of a practising Christian family supported by a statement from your religious leader to say you'd attended Church regularly for the last two years.

2) Evidence of the above for a non-Christian faith.

3) Siblings

4) Proximity to the school.

Not sure where SEN came into it.

They didn't have a catchment area. It was a rare event that anyone who couldn't prove their religious faith could get into that school even if they lived next door to it.

I hope that counts as personal experience. :rolleyes: