Author Topic: Chancellor's admissions policy  (Read 96053 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Margaret

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 206
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #60 on: February 22, 2003, 02:01:15 am »
Well said Jet! You can't have it both ways ML either you want community spirit where everyone gets involved or you don't. Many years ago when my children were young we started looking at schools so that we could live near the one we wanted to send them to, at the time we were living in Potters Bar. We decided we would like them to go to Chancellors, so we moved to Brookmans Park. Soon after we moved they decided to close Chancellors. As you can imagine I was a bit miffed! So I was one of many who petitioned the school and the council and waved my banner at county hall and fortunately they saw the error of their ways. It was by concerted effort on the part of the villages in the area (for whom Chancellors was built) not just a few parents but by all local residents that worked this miracle and that is was is needed now, BUT, too many new residents had already moved into the area intending to send their children elsewhere and couldn't care less if the local schools were there or not. Chancellors used to be a great local school closely involved with the primary school and it is very sad to see its demise as the local school. Signing petitions and writing to the government and the councils and the school by everyone not just the few parents whose children were omited is the only option I can see to try and end this sad situation. My children have long left school but that doesn't mean I don't care any longer about the school anymore. Children are our future and we must fight for that future in any way we can.
 

Offline Margaret

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 206
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #61 on: February 22, 2003, 02:03:52 am »
Sorry about spelling mistakes, rather tired have to pick my son up from the LOCAL university which he can't get a bus from as they don't run to Brookmans Park :-\
 

Offline jet

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Gender: Male
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #62 on: February 22, 2003, 12:58:14 pm »
Dear Margaret,
Thanks on behalf of all CONCERNED for the info, if any PARENTS wish to lobby THEIR local school regarding admissions the writer would be pleased to help (interfere ;) )colecting signatures in his road even though he has no children.
This is because I believe that this community would be stronger if it stuck together, even though this would be a bit insular surely keeping up all standards in this village would be benificial to us all in the long run.
I imagine that a lot of parents who have children at C would be reticent to help though as it would possibly prejudice the continued attendance of their offspring.
Parents who would like their offspring to attend would likely to be accused of having personal motives.
Spin and division its how it all works. >:(
Never forget you the people own these establishments, they were built with your money and are financed with your money.
I often see the EMPTY uni bus :( belching poison.
It is nice to know that your son has the benifit of going to the local poly, oops sorry uni. I passed on Harvard as the travelling time was a bit extended and what with the buses and roadworks :) :) :) :) :)
regards,
jet
« Last Edit: February 22, 2003, 12:59:14 pm by jet »
 

MikeL

  • Guest
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #63 on: February 23, 2003, 01:51:34 pm »
Margaret

There is one very big difference between the situation now and the situation when you fought to keep Chancellors open. When you were fighting, you were fighting WITH the school (I assume the school didn't want to close!). Now we are fighting AGAINST the school as it is the school (or it's governors) who have decided to implement the new admissions policy.

I am very interested to know how you feel about the way the school has treated the very people who (like yourself) supported it when  it was faced with closure.


MikeL
 

Offline Mermaid

  • Forum Moderator
  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1573
  • Thanked: 29 times
  • Gender: Female
  • Forum Member
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #64 on: February 23, 2003, 05:42:51 pm »
I agree Mike, the 'face' of the problem has indeed changed. Local parents have had to fight twice against the closure of Chancellors in the last 20 odd years, but both times we were on the same side as the school (which, indeed, did not want to be closed down). Overwhelmingly, the main support came from Brookmans Park and Welham Green (which has its own primary school, but not its own secondary school). Further, I recall a petition 2 - 3 years (?) ago, when Chancellor's was seeking to alter its admissions criteria. The message came back loud and clear from local residents in favour of offering places to local children first. Chancellors has let us all down!
 

Offline Jazz

  • Opinions on some things
  • **
  • Posts: 6
  • Gender: Male
  • Brookmans Park Forum Member
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #65 on: February 23, 2003, 07:40:24 pm »
So what to do next folks? The Chancellors' governers are probably looking at this year's intake right now! Perhaps everyone will sit tight, hold their breath and keep their fingers crossed - and all our children will get in this year. If not, here's a few ideas.......

Current parents of Brookmans Park JMI to ask the Headteacher and governors to meet with their counterparts at Chancellors with a view to securing places for all the JMI pupils that want/need a place. (The JMI governors should be taking a robust view of this anyway).

Brookmans Park parents who do get a place for their child, don't breathe a sigh of relief and 'pull the drawbridge up' but help your less fortunate friends and neighbours by lobbying from inside the school. Tell the governors that you think it's a poor show and ask for them to reconsider their attitude (this doesn't have to be confrontational, but should be direct).

Brookmans Park parents on the PTA are in the majority I'm told, well, boycott one meeting and let the Head know in advance with a polite letter explaining why - you want to show support for other Brookmans Park parents. Once again, polite and calm, but make the point.

A deluge of letters to anyone with any influence over Chancellors. A petition is always good and works well for the press, but hundreds of letters arriving on the desks of local and national education chiefs and MP's are very difficult for them to ignore.

Lastly (for now), if anyone out there has a bit of time and a legal bent, it may be interesting to have a look at whether there are any conditions or covenants that go with the land that Chancellors stands on, or with how it came to be set up as a school, e.g. for the benefit of the local community etc. A long shot I know, but why not!

Remember, united we stand.......................




 

Offline anna

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 251
  • Gender: Female
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #66 on: February 24, 2003, 03:25:57 am »
I have huge respect for the head of BP primary, but do have to say she will not get involved with this issue. Last year people were not even allowed to ask people to sign the petition on school premises.

However, Jazz, I think you have the right idea, if everyone pulls together someone has to listen.  It would be interesting to see if some of the "unadoped roads" were able to actually stop school traffic in protest to the school not taking children from those very roads.

If I was hanging around, I'd certainly help you Jazz, but see as we are leaving in a few months I can't do much. The only good thing is that hopefully some other local might get the place that we would have been offered.

 

Offline Margaret

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 206
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #67 on: February 24, 2003, 10:35:56 am »
Although I realise the fight isn't the same the point is we should all be pulling together as a village not as a parent or non parent. Surely the fact that the villagers are the ones that kept this school open is ammunition against Chancellors. Everybody who was involved in the fight to keep them open should be lobbying them and their MP's and anybody else they can think of, as well as the newer members of all the local villages. I to have great respect for the headmistress of the Primary school and I can quite understand why she cannot allow signatures to be collected on the school grounds but there is always the pavement outside the school gates for petition collecting! And where are all the banners, 'save our school' is still appropriate as that is what we want to do, save OUR school.
 

Mad_Dad

  • Guest
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #68 on: March 03, 2003, 10:08:50 am »
I think that we need to take into account the fact that it is not reasonable (or logical) to penalise children who live in villages without a school. It is only an accident of history that BP has a secondary school at all.
I think it is logical that, once Chancellor's has defined its catchment area, it treats each school equally in that area. This may appear to be hard on BP children, but is fairer overall.
The whole issue is much more complicated when you start looking at the problems which face parents in other areas - if I were to live in Potters Bar I wouldn't want to send my children to Mount Grace, just as people in BP don't want to send their children to Onslow St Audrey's.
If we are serious about tackling this problem then we have to come up with practical and viable solutions for everyone, not just one group of people, otherwise no-one will listen to us.
 

MikeL

  • Guest
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #69 on: March 03, 2003, 12:02:13 pm »
I would agree with you if all the schools played to the same rules, but they don’t. All the other schools in the area do appear to give preference to children living locally, which means that if you live in BP and don’t get in to Chancellors your only alternative is the school that no-one else wants to go to (ie Onslow). If you live in Hatfield or Potters Bar you can try for Chancellors and have a very good chance of getting in (as places are allocated proportionately according to the number of applications received from each primary school) but can also have a reasonable school as a fallback choice in case you don’t get in.

Of course the solution is for everyone who doesn’t get in to Chancellors to send their children to Onslow’s so that hopefully it will improve. But who is going to be the first person to do it? As far as I am aware no-one from Brookmans Park has ever actually gone there.
 

Offline Margaret

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 206
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #70 on: March 04, 2003, 10:47:33 am »
I fail to understand Mad_Dad's comments. Chancellors was not an accident of history it was built to serve the villages in this area as Potters Bar had it's own school plus Owens and Hatfiled had it's own schools (you're forgetting Bishops Hatfield). Therefore it is logical that if you live in Potters Bar you support your own school, therebye improving it, and if you live in Hatfield, you support your own school etc. A fact that Chancellors has forgotton is that it has a lot to thank the local residents of all the villages in this area who have supported it over the years helping to make it the school it is and now it has turned it's back on them in favour of other areas. In supporting Chancellors ideas we were unaware that we would be cutting our own throats as we were under the impression it was built for our benefit , not Potters Bar or Hatfield or any other area.
 

Offline Jazz

  • Opinions on some things
  • **
  • Posts: 6
  • Gender: Male
  • Brookmans Park Forum Member
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #71 on: March 06, 2003, 11:41:14 am »
Well, we've been turned down by Chancellors, got the letter this morning. Our Potters Bar friends all got their letters yesterday, and yes, they've all got Chancellors. I suppose we should look on the bright side - at least we've been allocated Mount Grace and not Onslow's!

Local insurrection anyone?  :-\
 

Offline anna

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 251
  • Gender: Female
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #72 on: March 06, 2003, 03:05:30 pm »
Just thought it would be interesting to see who got in and who didn't.  
 
We did get a place, but of course we won't be taking it because we are moving, so hopefully someone else will get our place. Good luck.
 

Offline Mermaid

  • Forum Moderator
  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1573
  • Thanked: 29 times
  • Gender: Female
  • Forum Member
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #73 on: March 11, 2003, 03:57:17 pm »
I gather that all the boys that didn't get Chancellors have been offered Mount Grace?

Congratulations to the father who has been encouraging parents to write to the Schools Adjudicator regarding Chancellors admission criteria! Only by making our voices heard are we going to be able to stop Chancellors discriminating against Brookmans Park children!

Today is the last day for first class post. Write to 'The Schools Adjudicator, 3rd Floor, Vincent House, 2 Woodland Rise, Darlington  DL3 7PJ

 

jthomas

  • Guest
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #74 on: March 15, 2003, 01:15:02 pm »
I am not trying to put the cat amongst the pigeons but I can not really see any reason why children that attend Brookmans Park Primary should get a place at Chacellors school over other children in the catchment area. If school is classed as a feeder school then all the children that attend these schools get an equal chance of admission once the siblings and children that are taken on their ability (sporting, dramatic, musical) have their places. The children that are taken on ability only amount to approximatley 17 per year. These children are generallyetemely talented often representing their country or at least county (in sporting terms) and in terms of musical ability I know the also need to have achieved extremely high grades already, therefore after school activities etc. don't really cut it I'm afraid. The point is that Chancellors is not taking children on academic ability and the GSCE grades are reflecting the schools achievments rather than the natural academic ability of the child. The places that are left over are evenly distributed between the feeder schools eg. if there are 5 places per school then they will take the 5 closest to Chancellors (as the crow flies) from Brookmans Park Primary, the 5 closest from Labrooke, the 5 closest from Little Heath and so on, I am led to understand there are about 23 feeder schools! So this IS fair as the children from PB certainly arn't getting in to Owens & have to travel to BP to get to school. If it were not for children in the other 22 feeder schools Chancellors probably would have been closed down during the 80's.
 

John_fraser

  • Guest
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #75 on: March 15, 2003, 11:43:50 pm »
Brookmans Park Primary School has 45 pupils in every year. According to this site, Chancellors School has an intake of 170 pupils each year. Therefore, even if every pupil at Brookmans Park Primary School is automatically granted and accepts a place at Chancellors School, the majority of the places remain open to other feeder schools and for selective admission. So in no way is anyone trying to exclude children from Potters Bar or Hatfield from the school.

Is there any reason why children at Brookmans Park Primary School should be given preferential treatment? In my opinion, yes. Firstly, the vast majority of children at Brookmans Park Primary School live in, or very close to, Brookmans Park. Chancellors School is the only local school for these children and if they are rejected they are forced to travel several miles to another school. The reality of our public transport system means that these journeys will be carried out in private cars. So every morning, cars travel out of the village while other cars and buses drive non-local pupils into the village. This has an impact on the quality of life of all of the residents near Chancellors School, not just those with children. We have already discussed how some people have taken exception to buses and parents parking along Moffats Lane.

Also to be bracketed under “quality of life” is the cost we all pay to have Chancellors School in the village. A good school nearby – and Chancellors is a very good school, otherwise none of us would care – pushes up the cost of your house. This frequently has the effect of pushing up your council tax. So all of us are paying for the privilege of having Chancellors School here, even if we don’t get to use it.

At this point we should remember that, in the past, the residents of the village successfully campaigned to stop the closure of the school. It also carries out fund raising in the village and – ironically – publishes “Chancellors Community News!” But it appears that Chancellors School has neither the gratitude nor the community spirit to want to help the community. They advertise for jumble all over the village, but apparently this year accepted no children without older siblings who lived more than half a mile from the school. They want your jumble, your money, your time and your support but not your child!

Secondly, Chancellors School is overwhelmingly the first choice of children who go to Brookmans Park Primary School. To refuse to take a substantial number of them is to break up friendships. And because the sub selection within Brookmans Park School is based upon distance, we have another “post code lottery” in our lives. This of course does not end with the rejection. Because the rejected children have to travel further to school, they are less lightly to be able to take part in after school activities or see their friends after school.

Finally, there is the benefit Chancellors School gets from being in Brookmans Park. I went to school near Broadwater Farm in Tottenham. There were frequently gang fights after school, the school was regularly broken into and graffiti and vandalism were the expected norm. By comparison, Brookmans Park is a tranquil oasis. Even compared to Potters Bar and Hatfield, there is remarkably little anti-social behaviour in the village and none around Pine Grove. You could hardly ask for a better place to situate a school. This quiet oasis, conducive to learning is thanks to the people who live here. Is it too much to expect our children to be accepted into the school?

What I am asking for and what I believe the majority of parents here would like to see is the acceptance criteria to be modified to the following:

1 Children with siblings still at the school. Note that this changes the current policy, which gives children who’s older siblings have left the school preferential treatment. The sibling rule seems sensible to me because it greatly helps parents to have to deal with only one school and for the support a child can receive from its older siblings at the same school. Neither of which apply if the older siblings have already left the school.
2      Selection of 10% of the children with proven aptitude in desired areas
3      Children attending Brookmans Park Primary School
4      Children attending other named feeder schools, with the number of places allocated to each school being based upon the number of places applied for by that school.
5      Distance from the school

The only changes to the current admission policy is in point 1 and the addition of point 3. But if you object to giving Brookmans Park Primary School special status, consider this: If the number of places awarded to each feeder school was not based upon the number of children applying, but instead all the children applying from these feeder schools were graded on the distance they live from Chancellors, then Brookmans Park Primary School would probably require no special status, with all, or almost all, of its children qualifying. It would also be fairer to the parts of Potters Bar which are closer to Chancellors than some parts of Brookmans Park.

No one is asking for major changes, all that is being asked for is to allow our children to attend a local school. If you have children at Brookmans Park Primary School – in any year, or if you have children who you want to send to a local school, if you would like to see less cars in the school run, if you would like to see less cars and coaches park on Moffats Lane or if you just feel that past support should not be so quickly forgotten, then I strongly urge you to write to the governors of Chancellors school, our MP Melanie Johnson and councillors and ask them to change the admissions policy or bring pressure to bare to change this policy.
 

jthomas

  • Guest
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #76 on: March 16, 2003, 01:55:43 pm »
I feel it is important to remember that due to Owens admissions policy children in Potters Bar only realistically have a choice of Mount Grace or Chancellors. When I left Chancellors 10yrs ago it certainly wasn't over subscribed as it is today, during my years at the school there was even talk of a merger with Mount Grace!It is because Chancellors has such a wide catchment area and of course the dedication of those such as Colin Evans that the school stayed open during the 80's in order to establish the reputation it now has.

I feel the community that you mention does fully include Potters Bar and Hatfield and this is fairly reflected in the admissions policy. Going to a school such as Chancellors provides an excellent opportunity to meet new people from a variety of backgrounds and develop social and daily living skills such as using public tranport.

Every year parents all over the country go through the torment that many are going through now and they have to make decisions that will effect their childs future but I feel it is wrong to discriminate against a child because he/she is not fortunate enough to have parents wealthy enough to afford a property in Brookmans Park.

I feel that Chancellors admissions policy is fair and well thought out; The school benefits from the diversity of children that it brings to the school.

I do understand how distressing it is when a child does not get offered his/her first, second or sometimes even third choice as was the case last year for one girl at Sunnybank school, but as you can see the distress and upset is the same whether you live in Brookmans Park, Potters Bar, Hatfield or anywhere else. I really do understand that it is a emotive issue, and perhaps this very fact makes it difficult to make a fair judgement. Although I did not attend Brookmans Park Primary school my family have supported it since it opened as my grandfather was headteacher for many years, therefore I do feel it is important to remember that people from Potters Bar and other surrounding towns etc. regularly attend and support functions in aid of the school and community etc.  
 

TrueLies

  • Guest
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #77 on: March 16, 2003, 04:01:47 pm »
Quote
3      Children attending Brookmans Park Primary School


John.
Without knowing the Primary School's admission policy, wouldn't this just create more demand to get into the Primary School?. This would surely create more school run journeys from parents as opposed to Secondary School pupills who can manage the journey alone (hopefully).

Jimmy
p.s. My theory is you judge a school by the size of tie-knots worn by the pupils.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2003, 04:02:20 pm by TrueLies »
 

John_fraser

  • Guest
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #78 on: March 16, 2003, 09:45:34 pm »
Again I state that no-one is trying to exclude children from other schools. Brookmans Park Primary School would take a relatively small percentage of the available spaces. Potters Bar families would still have the choice of three schools and the current majority of pupils from outside Brookmans Park at Chancellors School would be maintained. What little diversity there is would remain. All that would change is the ending of an unfair system where children living under a mile from Chancellor’s School are rejected, while children leaving several times further away are buses into the area.

Speaking as a parent who is not wealthy, I don’t see that giving local families the chance to go to a local school is discriminating against anyone. Brookmans Park Primary School is also a good, well run school. Its selection is firstly siblings of children currently at the school, followed by distance from the school. If Chancellors School followed the same system why would it not be fair?
 

Offline jet

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Gender: Male
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #79 on: March 17, 2003, 12:20:37 am »
Well written JF.
Jimmy your judgement of schools by their tie knots is spot on.
All these children are being used as pawns in civil servants games.
What about childrens human rights to local education which does not involve the stress of extended journeys.
It is all about control.
The ridiculous debasing grovelling which some parents selfishly undertake to get their children a place in so called better schools would be amusing if it were not so frightening.
Lots and lots of paper in a world of computers.
About time the people concerned took back power from the civil servants and instructed them to do what their employers the taxpayer want.
Whose schools are they!
Tail wagging the dog as usual.
regards,
jet
 

jthomas

  • Guest
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #80 on: March 17, 2003, 11:07:39 pm »
For B P primary to regain preferred feeder school status with all pupils being offered places would indeed be extremely unfair; As John has informed the forum each year at Brookmans Park Primary has 45 pupils! If all of these pupils were offered places that is 26.5% of all available places obviously on top of these would be siblings from other schools and the 10% accepted on ability. I certainly do not regard this as a relatively small number of available spaces in fact I would suggest that it is an extremely large number of places every year. I think the stats. speak for themselves and we can now clearly see what an unfair system this would create.
I also agree that this would ensure that Brookmans Park Primary would become a school in high demand in order to secure place at Chancellors which of course is the wrong reason to choose a school.

I feel the current admissions policy is fair and I myself will be in the same situation in a few years when I try to get my children into Chancellors.
 

Offline anna

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 251
  • Gender: Female
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #81 on: March 18, 2003, 02:58:29 am »
It's not just about feeder schools. It should be about distance.  Children from 11plus should be able to WALK to their local school, that would keep kids fitter and healther. It would cut down traffic problems everywhere.  I'm sure everyone has noticed how much clearer the roads are during school holidays, this shows the huge volume of traffic made by children haveing to travel to school.  If all schools took from their local area's we wouldn't have such a problem. Owen's hardly take any local children. Mount Grace look children from Westminster, which I understand caused a lot of problems and put many locals off sending their children.

Intake should be based on Distance, if they are not prepared to do this, the local council should start laying on school buses (which do not have to be paid for) so that it reduces traffic.  You want to try living near your local school, and not being able to get out of your drive, or having to dodge past badly parked cars..........only to then find out you can't even get your own child in!  

Places should be offered locally, regardless of what primary school they go to, and then any extra places can be offered further afield.

Our children our run everywhere by car these days, we need to bring back the idea of walking and being independent. I would now allow my child to walk alone, but if there are a group of kids all walking home together I'd be happy with that, and it gives them time to work on social skills. I'd be equally happy for them to travel on a school bus, but would not be happy with them waiting around at bus stops or going by public transport at the age of 11 or 12. Especially at times when they are at school late.

It just makes sense to send your child to a local school, it's as simple as that.
 

John_fraser

  • Guest
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #82 on: March 18, 2003, 10:52:48 am »
45 is the maximum number of children that BPS could put forward. As each year a few pupils would probably not take their places, the numbers would be lower than this. Some pupils from BPS would be granted places on the sibling and 10% rule in any case and even under the current system the remaining pupils would gain a share of the remaining places. Therefore, the percentage of “favoured” places granted to BPS would be a far lower than 26%. It should also be noted that the pupils who would gain from this would come from the less “wealthy” side of the village i.e. those children “not fortunate enough to have parents wealthy enough to afford a property in [the more expensive end of the village].

If, as Anna says, we make the rule on distance across all feeder schools i.e. pool all applications and take the 170 living closets – after deducting the siblings and 10% - then there would be a truly level playing field. More pupils could walk, others have shorter journeys, Potters Bar and Hatfield would not be excluded.

Neither change would push more pupils into BPS. This school, which is already “in demand” and is as good a primary school as Chancellors is a secondary, operates a fair policy of selecting children of current siblings followed by distance. Therefore we would not see pupils travelling from far to get there.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2003, 03:09:43 pm by John_fraser »
 

jthomas

  • Guest
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #83 on: March 18, 2003, 11:06:37 pm »
 I would like to address the comments made about traffic congestion caused by the coaches, cars and buses required to take the children to and from Chancellors. Judging by the amount of cars outside the primary school every morning and afternoon, right through to the village! I even hear now the church has offered to open the car park up for parents to park so the traffic must now be getting worse by the day, then I doubt very much the children would be fit and healthy enough to walk the journey, if parents cannot be bothered to walk their children to school at such a young age I can't see how these same children are going to suddenly want to walk to school. Much of the traffic going through the village is caused by the primary school as the buses etc go straight out on to the A1000!! Therfore the diffirence noticed is probably due to  Brookmans Park Primary being off!

I would debate as to whether Chancellors can be classed as a village school just because it happens to be situated in a village. Chancellors was never designed solely to accomodate the children from the primary school. Otherewise why would they offer 170 places per year? (Over 200 last year) I have never heard of a school having such preferred treatment that they were automatically granted a places for all pupils.

As Chancellors take from so many schools I cannot see a fairer way of doing things, and it seems good sense on the part of whom ever makes these decisions. This seems to me to be the "only truly level playing field". As for more pupils could walk this surely would be a new experience for most pupils. I don't suppose people would be so outraged if it was Onslow in Brookmans Park. It looks to me that people are using excuses to try and ensure places at a good school rather than being in the same situation as the rest of the country.

One more thing about the traffic, if these measures would make such a diffirence to the congestion then it shows just how many places you are talking about. Brookmans Park primary is only one school out of 23 I have seen no good reason as to why these children deserve preferential treatment.  
 

John_fraser

  • Guest
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #84 on: March 18, 2003, 11:54:41 pm »
True, too many pupils are driven to BPS, although a fair number do walk. Though it must be remembered that a child of 4 can not walk as far as a child of 11. Nor can they be trusted to walk to school on their own, which pushes some parents into cars in order to meet other commitments. It also must be noted that a child not given a place in Chancellors is putting two cars on the road. The one they travel out of the village in and the one driving the other child in.

BPS does not need preferential treatment if we go with Anna’s method. But if we are to assume the current system is fairer because one school should not be given special treatment, why not make it a truly level paying field? Why are there 23 feeder schools and not 24, or 34 or 300? Why not allow any child to apply for a place no matter what school they go to? Of course, you would need to allocate the places, but then distance from the school seems fair.

If Chancellors were not a good school then it is true that no-one would care. Of course, our houses and council tax would also be cheaper, and I dare say that if Mount Grace were a better school, or Dame Alice Owen took more pupils we wouldn’t be seeing parents from outside the village defending the status quo. But Chancellors is a good school and it is in the village. All that is being asked for is that local children should be given the chance to go to a local school.

To see the effect of changing the system, look at the break down of pupils this year:
Chancellor’s 21
Mount Grace 9
Dame Alice Owen 8
Bishop’s Hatfield 6
Francis Bacon 1

Francis Bacon was by choice, as were some, if not all, of the Bishop’s Hatfiled places and we can assume that all of the Dame Alice Owen places were by choice. We can probably assume that none of the Mount Grace places were by choice. Therefore, this year it would have affected between 9 and 14 pupils i.e. well under 9% of the available places would have been allocated on a “favoured” school basis and possibly as little as 5%. Either way it is a lot less than the 17 places or 10% allocated to selected desired ability.
 

Offline jet

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Gender: Male
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #85 on: March 19, 2003, 12:00:25 am »
Dear Jt,
At the risk of appearing abrupt, which part of local do you not understand?
Local schools to fill local needs= more quallity time and less pollution.
So how do locals travel to/from PB, I had ocassion to walk to South PB and back (50 mins ew) along the A1000,I did not see one bus.
Any wonder why there is a school run!
Another thing that I naively find hard to comprehend is the generally accepted statement nowadays about "good schools, bad schools"
Surely if the teachers are all at a similar standard and if the schools have desks, chairs, non white boards, chalk, ink and the odd computer/test tubes etc. then the only thing that can make the difference about good or bad can be the teachability of the pupils? I would imagine that this has more to do with the socio/economic background of the parents than anything else ( a good cop out, ie if you are poor you are thick/ignorant then you are a failure) well we know this is untrue.
The obvious conclusion is that like most things the infrastructure has deteriorated for whatever reasons.
I will not dare to mention the language/ethnic problems which exist in mostly the inner cities in particular ( gov. figures not any zenophobia on my part )
Back to basics, I fear :o
How sad that parents think they can buy intellect :(
regards,
jet
« Last Edit: March 19, 2003, 12:39:44 am by jet »
 

Offline James Bentall

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1194
  • Thanked: 27 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Keep :-)
    • Brookmans Park Newsletter
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #86 on: March 19, 2003, 01:22:44 am »
Quote

Another thing that I naively find hard to comprehend is the generally accepted statement nowadays about "good schools, bad schools"
Surely if the teachers are all at a similar standard ..... then the only thing that can make the difference about good or bad can be the teachability of the pupils?


Getting slightly off topic, but Sorry Jet, completely disagree with that one. As someone 'inside the system', you can get a huge variety in the 'quality' of teacher, and this can make a real difference to a school, particularly if that person is in the management. That statement of yours is like saying that all Lawyers are as good as each other, so why do some cost a lot more!
James Bentall, Brookmans Park, Herts.
I post in a personal capacity and not on behalf of North Mymms Parish Council
 

Offline jet

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Gender: Male
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #87 on: March 19, 2003, 02:34:17 am »
Dear James,
I did say I was naive :) :)
So I take it then that teaching is just like every other so called profession, full of chancers, who cannot even apply a set out curiculum.
Yet the government would have us think standards are really high, statistics eh.
So called degrees and qualifications eh, they mean nothing in the great scheme of things, merely licences to practice, paid for by attendance and spin on achievement figures.
As I said, back to basics.
regards,
jet
and the pawns are the young :(
 

Offline anna

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 251
  • Gender: Female
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #88 on: March 19, 2003, 03:34:14 am »
I've said it before on this forum and I'll say it again! Some of us do not have just one child at one school, so the option of walking is not always open to us, as all schools start at the same time. It would be impossible for me to walk my older kids to school (at least 20 mins each way) and get my younger two to nursery. However, it would make life a lot easier in a few years if my older two were at a local secondary school, thus could walk to school alone, and I could enjoy walking with the younger two.

There will always be those that choose to drive....but by offering local schools it would reduce traffic. Simple as that!

By taking from the local area, you would still get a good cross section of children. Why should chancellors offer places "gifted" in the arts. How about a local child who might well be gifted but doesn't have parents who can afford "private" lessons.

Because of how the system works right now, all that it is doing is pushing many people towards private education, because their children are forced into a school a parent doesn't want which is sometimes quite some distance away. Of course many people can afford private, but I've seen friends selling houses and cars just to give their child an education because the system let them down. ONe of my friends who lives in Potters Bar, last year got offered a place in at a school in Bushey, that's madness.

I don't mean to be rude here, but anyone who has not yet been through the stress of having to sit their children for entry exams for a mere 60 places, or hoping against hope they get their local school can not comment. Because when you find it's your child that doesn't get a place at your choosen school, I promise you will feel different because it's not just about the parent, its also about the children wanting to go to a local school where they have local friends. As kids get older they don't want "mummy and daddy" taking them everywhere, they want some freedom and need to be able to meet up with friends.  

It comes back to community, if most of the youth grow up and have friends in the local area, they are more likely to stay there and take pride in it. If there friends are further a field, then why stay?


 

Offline jet

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Gender: Male
Re: Chancellor's admissions policy
« Reply #89 on: March 19, 2003, 11:51:37 am »
By what mandate do these schools which like chancellors specialise in the arts (shall we say) manage to specialise.
Surely all schools should teach the basic curriculum with what amounts to glorified hobbies being the subject of private study.
This can then be channeled in to vocational training, perhaps on the job, when the young person has sufficient basic education to understand so called further education.
The media for instance trains 100 people for every (roughly) 10 available jobs, same goes for acting which I think has even less job chances.
To some degree if you can read properly you can self teach, the youngsters that are allowed to get away without learning to read are consigned to a life time of under achievement and personal development.
Its like an upside down pyramid.
regards,
jet
P.S. what do you say to a newly qualified airline pilot.
"Big mac and fries, please" ( please being optional)
What do you say to a skilled, qualified, experienced engineer.
"Dinosaur, time you re trained in I.T."
 

Tags: