Dartford Grammar School (DGS) New Admission Criteria

@MrsRobinsonsHandprints I love that you (as others before) are making assumptions about my personal circumstances, when all I am doing is pointing out (some of) the inconsistencies between admission criteria amongst schools very close to one-another and with very similar ethos / values.

@SheilaFentiman Completely agree with you: different people would have different views, based on their personal circumstances and personal sensitivities, that's why I think it is silly to argue whether a policy is fair (or unfair) in absolute terms.

But the inconsistencies I have raised are factual and some questions should be asked on why, for example, if you love in New Barn (9 miles away) you are deemed to be part of the local Dartford Community, but if you live in Crayford (1.5miles away) you are not.

Similarly with the sibling rule: one should not be able to claim that it is fair for WGS / WGSG / BG / C&S / Beths / Townley to have one but, at the same time, to claim that for DGS / DGSG it is fair not to have one.

Thanks for your views.

@Piggletta I appreciate your views but, as I said before, everyone's views are somewhat affected by their own personal circumstances and biased towards a favorable outcome for themselves and (in this case) their children.

Everyone would have a different definition of local community, but several people would agree that the one currently used by DGS is unfair.

As an example, in the case of DGS, if you live in Crayford or Bexley (on the West of the school, but outside the Kent border) you fall out of the catchment area despite being 1.5-2.0 miles away from the school (road distance). But if you live in, say, in New Barn (on the South-East of the the school, but in Kent) you are within the catchment area despite being 9.0 miles away from the school.

The difference in the cut-off at DGS is also currently about 20 marks, but this is going to increase significantly from the Sep 2025 intake, because of the increased number of places (140 out of 190) allocated to the Zone A applicants - probably this is going to be closer to 30 marks difference going forward, and I can guarantee you that this is a very significant difference in 'performance' when it comes to the 11+ Kent Test (please check the distribution score amongst all students taking the test - this is published by the Kent Council annually).

What's even more interesting (double whammy!) is that if you live in Dartford, you are not being discriminated by the Bexley LA when applying to a Bexley Grammar through their own 11+ Test: places are allocated (mostly) through distance, regardless of whether you live in or out of the Bexley LA.

So, like with everything, we may all share the same general principles and values, but the devil is in the details and the system is far from fair.

@LilacPoet I think we had this conversation already.

@TickingAlongNicely Exactly, they could if they wanted to. I wonder why they haven't done so, considering all the other local grammars have.

@LadyLapsang I agree with your comment.

@TickingAlongNicely That is not correct.

Bexley Grammar, Chis & Sid, Townley, Beths, Wilmington Grammar, Wilmington Grammar for Girls: these are all relatively local to DGS / DGSG and they all have a sibling priority rule.

Thanks.

@LilacPoet That's not what I said.

What I said is that the School Admission Code does not forbid DGS / DGSG to have the sibling priority rule within their admission criteria, hence they could add this if they think it would be consistent with / supportive of their ethos / objectives.

Hence my initial question, trying to understand what DGS want to achieve (i.e. serve more the local community, if we look at the most recent change in their criteria).

Thanks for the conversation.

@LilacPoet No offence taken regarding your comments on my personal circumstances.

On the School Admission Code, we are going to have to disagree, as it would be silly to ignore that 75% of places at DGS are allocated on the basis of a catchment area (hence, ringfenced for the benefit of the local community).

Many thanks for the conversation.

@LilacPoet I am sorry you are turning my enquiry into a personal attack, especially as you don't know about my personal circumstances. I am therefore ignoring your comments regarding what is inconvenient to me.

Regarding your other comments on the DGS admission policy, well, please let me point out to you again that 140 places (out of 190) are indeed ringfenced for local applicants (that is about three=quarter of all places). Even more, some very local students (i.e. living in the Bexley LA) fall out of the catchment area (as they are not in Kent), hence frankly this not so much about the local community (i.e. distance from the school) and more about protecting Kent students.

I am not arguing whether this is right or wrong (different people will have different views, mostly depending on how convenient it is to their personal circumstances), but it is a matter of fact (please read the admission criteria if you are still unsure).

As a result, DGS (or Kent Council) cannot claim that school places are allocated on the basis of score, when 'de facto' the most relevant admission criteria is whether or not applicants live within the catchment area.

Now, in this context, the School Admission Code would deem illegal the introduction of a sibling priority rule, hence I must assume that the school has chosen not to apply it.

Just for comparison purposes, in Bexley the top 180 scorers in the 11+ test are allocated a place in their own school of choice (out of the 4 grammars in that LA). That would be (on average) 45 places per school, which is comparable to the residual places left at DGS after taking care of the Zone A applicants. Well, all Bexley grammars have a sibling priority rule in their admission criteria, despite about 25% of places potentially allocated by ranking scores (very similar percentage to DGS).

That's all. As I said before, just trying to understand DGS ethos / objective in having such admission criteria, and whether they have considered adding the sibling rule (which would be allowed under the School Admission Code, for the reasons I explained above).

@LilacPoet I appreciate there's no definition for super-selective schools, but I disagree with your comment regarding DGS ranking on score. How would you explain that to the tens (perhaps hundreds) of OOC applicants that scored above 386 and were never offered a place)? A fairer reflection of their admission criteria would be that they mainly allocate places on catchment area, as they ringfence 140 places (73% of the total) for local kids.