Labour reviewing school admission criteria

It’s a pity you didn’t quote or link to the whole article then.

Isn’t a poorer parent requesting an out-of-catchment place being “sharp-elbowed” themselves? Surely to make things really fair they should randomly select pupils? Can’t have anybody trying to improve their lot or it defeats the object.

I believe this is the proposal in Brighton. No catchments and it’s luck of the draw. Hang the environment. (btw are the Greens interested in the environment any more or is that a bit passé and sandally?)

The provision to include PP children as a category in ones admissions process already exists.

Posters said the same about welfare cuts. Speculation etc

I don't understand how selective state funded faith schools are still allowed, I'd much rather they got rid of them.

I don't think this would be likely to have a huge impact personally. The people on lower incomes round here that i know wouldn't be taking their child miles out of their way to go to a better school anyway, for a whole host of reasons.

Nope, if you read the article in its entirety, it says at the top that it was conservatives who came up with this.

The suggested Labour change is to put socio-economic background into the Equality Act where it was in 2010 before the Tories removed it.

When this was in the act, an explanatory note suggested that it could apply to schools admissions by making councils more mindful of whether information about how to apply to schools was equally accessible in disadvantaged areas and to work on getting that information to disadvantaged areas if not.

Absolutely NOTHING about changing admissions to prioritise FSM kids.

Still, the Tories who planted this article must be loving the people who are sucking it up as if their article, and this thread, is actual Labour policy.

It’s not made up but, had you bothered to quote the entire article, everyone arguing about it would know it’s a rightwing interpretation of what might happen. The guidance has still to be published so it’s pure conjecture at this point.

Well, of course, it’s mainly down to the parents.

I live in a very deprived area. I’ve just checked my children’s school on the government website and it’s 57.2% of children on free school meals.

It’s the a sort of place where parents smoke weed on the school run, fight in the playground, we have no PTA or school events as a lot of them would just turn up pissed or fight. They only recently brought back parents being allowed to school plays - they were filmed and emailed for yonks as parents couldn’t be trusted, brought them back last Christmas as we had two dads lamping the shit out of each other half way though the reception nativity.

The school and the teachers try everything. I can’t fault the teachers, they are wonderful. A new head came in 3 years ago and has taken it from 15 years of failure to rated “good” for the first time in 20 years.

The children that do well, do very well because they have active, interested parents who engage with the teachers. It’s so polarised. A lot of the children don’t do well as they are brought up to think school is a punishment and teachers are all out to get them. They see their mum screaming in a teachers face at pick up, they will do that too.

Now, not all families on FSM are the same, but where I live, the stats match the school.

I agree
It does sound like a very Starmer/ Labour type policy

One might misinterpret it if one is a Tory speaking to the Telegraph. Especially if one missed (or ignored) that the guidance for implementation has not yet been published.

I am on the fence on this one - I think it may depend what part of the country you live in. I believe school catchment areas should be wide enough to promote diversity, particularly in large cities like London. When catchments are too small, they can feel insular and limit children’s exposure to different perspectives and backgrounds. Education isn’t just about academics, t’s also about learning from people with varied life experiences.

In my own case, I would have hated to attend the nearest school, even though it was only a short walk away. Commuting by train and bus gave me the chance to meet people from different parts of the city, which broadened my outlook and enriched my school experience.

The school I hope my children will attend draws students from across London and selects based on merit, creating a dynamic mix of cultures and ideas. I believe more schools could benefit from widening their catchment areas to attract a broader pool of talent. Doing so would not only improve diversity, but also raise the overall quality of education. I am probably biased as the top performing London school have big catchment areas.

I don’t think anyone cares if their children are with other wealthy children. They want their children to go to school with children who value education. On average children miss out on 3 years of schooling because of disruptive behaviour. The only way parents can get their children into schools with a higher number of motivated children is to try to get into schools where parents have done their research and care enough to use their ‘sharp elbows’. I don’t think parents should be sneered at for wanting the best education for their children but I guess many on the left wouldn’t agree.

Of course private is now more elite. Now they’re going for the mc who use good state. They’ll keep going until it’s all the same low level.

From the article in the OP - which is from The Telegraph about the Tories’ interpretation of the changes, by the way. Lots of coulds and ifs.

The Government has not yet brought in guidance to explain how it would be implemented, but the Conservatives said it could herald “class discrimination” in school admissions.

It could mean pupils priced out of their places at independent schools would be further punished for their perceived privilege: being placed at the bottom of waiting lists for school places

The irony with the VAT on fees is that it’s the poorer families who’ve been hit hardest. The wealthiest families have either pre-paid and avoided VAT, or aren’t affected by a 20% hike. The middle families who’ve been scrimping and saving are now struggling to afford it and are increasingly having to switch to state. The poorer families (often 20% or so of a school are on some kind of means tested bursary) now can’t access the schools at all, because schools are increasingly withdrawing bursary provision or diverting it to existing students who are now struggling.

Let’s repeat that again in case Labour missed it the first time

I am so glad I went to the schools closest to me, which were under 15 minutes walk away. Having all children in an area attend the same school is so much better for the environment, for traffic congestion, for arranging school buses as needed, for parents without cars or without time, for social cohesion ... "Choice" is not in fact the highest good an education system should be aiming for.

That said there are definitely benefits to not segregating schools by class, and the "attack on the middle classes" narrative on here is largely insane. I would worry a bit about pupils from certain backgrounds pulling down educational or behavioural standards. But I'm not sure there's a big effect of that when they're only there in relatively small numbers, whereas there is also the counter effect that being around lots of kids from families who take education and behaviour seriously can potentially really help those whose families don't.

Or you get a struggling family with no spare cash, no car , time poor as well as cash poor, desperate for a place at the local primary which means they can drop their dc off on their way to work but no they get allocated a school the other side of town and have to leave super early and get 2 buses.

Whilst my kids have left school now this is exactly what my background is.

My parents were a site labourer and cleaner. As we went to church i got into the best school in the area which was a religious one. I went to Uni got a professional qualification and married a graduate. Our kids subsequently benefited
Now their kids will feel the effects of us and them striving for more

Yes of course that's what a solicitor would do. In the real world it might level the playing field a bit and all schools will improve.