School being set up by wealthy city types "snubs" poorer children

[ISNT]

I saw this headline in the shops today - article is here. If what it says is correct it's terrible, surely. Does anyone know anything about it? Aren't there any rules about how these new schools can choose their pupils? It all seems very strange.

So an alternative independent school near me is applying for free school status. Atm parents pay the fees. If they get the status, it will be free and the government will fund it.

I understand we are in dire need of new schools, and it is cheaper to do this than build new ones. But how does the above save the government money?

ISNT: I've just googled High View. It's definitely closer than both Wix and Falconbrook.

Bloody hell marsha.

I wonder what entry criteria they are going to put in

But all the people there already and siblings get their lovely private education for free. It's just so so dodgy.

So when they say wix is 1.5 miles away and falconbrook 1.3 miles away is that not true?

It's probably true, but I've no convenient way of checking. Honeywell and Belleville are both less than 0.5 mile, and guessing from the Wix distance, then High View is about 1 mile or less. so although it sounds close, they are not the 3 nearest.

Hang on a minute.

This is the Daily Mirror. A well known left leaning newspaper. I do not see any evidence in the article to back up the claim made in the headline.

The headline may be true but there needs to be some evidence. Like others I thought the rules were quite strict to prevent admissions beng skewed by unfair selection criteria.

That said, existing state primary schools in wealthy catchment areas exclude poor children because house prices are high. This may also happen in this new school by virtue of its catchent area policy.

Beenbeta the evidence is there surely. As they have said that the 3 feeder schools chosen include the schools with wealthier parents, while a school which is nearer then one of the chosen schools but has a poorer parent profile has been overlooked.

If that's true (if it is true that falconbrook is 1.3 miles away and has not been included, but wealthier wix 1.5 miles away has) then that looks pretty damn fishy.

If there are good reasons for their choice eg falconbrook already feeds into somewhere and the others don't, then I'm surprised that they haven't used this to counter the accusations (have seen this in about 3 different papers online).

If they have done as the papers say and there is no good reason then it seems to me that they have broken the rules on setting admissions criteria for these schools.

I think the wealthy catchment area applies here and also you need to factor in that the area "between the Commons" is simply stuffed with families with children (hence tiny admissions areas). They have chosen the 3 nearest primaries though, and I can't see it would have been any different had Wandsworth opted to open an ordinary new secondary school.

But I thought we'd said that they haven't chosen the 3 nearest primaries? As wix is further away than falconbrook.

Getting now

But I mean let's face it, all people need to do is set new schools up in wealthy areas and bingo desired effect is achieved and fully within the rules.

Have any propositions been received for areas with high levels of deprivation I wonder.

Sorry - you're right: I misread the article and thought that Wix had also been excluded. The other 3 feeders are closer. If there is a geographical argument, it would have to be based on the distance to the next nearest secondary - Falconbrook is nearer to both Ashcroft and Battersea Tech, whereas Wix is right up on the edge of the borough boundary and not that close to anywhere - I think many of the children from there go outside the borough to Lambeth Academy at the moment.

And I should add that I'm amazed at the Wix average income figures - it's doesn't match reputation. I wonder if it's skewed by the bi-lingual stream in the school which does attract rich French families.

I thought that there must be a reason, which is why I started the thread. I am surprised that they have not raised this in their defence TBH. As on the face of it, it looks really fishy.

Will be interesting to see how this pans out.

I know ISNT. Seems crazy to me. I must admit the parents at the school already are very excited at the thought of getting independent-like education and not have to pay for it.

ISNT - "all people need to do is set new schools up in wealthy areas and bingo desired effect is achieved and fully within the rules."

That is what will happen. Middle class enclaves with well off, well connected, motivated parents with the means and the money and the know how will inevitably be more likely to set up their own schools.

Lets face it, the phenomenon of high league table schools with tiny catchment areas in well off leafy suburbs is not exactly a new phenomenon.

I think the Mirror out to focus on why so many state schools are so bad that parents refuse to send their DCs to them.

That said, I still think it would be fairer to give every parent a voucher so anyone can choose the school they want to send their DCs to, whether state or private.

This scheme is just really a really inefficent voucher scheme by another name.

Parents get state money to spend setting up what in effect is a quasi private school. I can see some private schools actually being interested in opting in to this scheme just to get state cash.

I heard that the teachers don't have to be qualified either, and obviously they don't have to stick to the national curriculum.

I don't understand it at all. If it is the case that people don't need to be qualified to teach and the national curriculum is unnecessary, why not do that for all schools. It seems illogical.

Hmm. I used to live round there - haven't got a measuring tape but I'd be surprised if Wix is closer than Falconbrook. Honeywell is definitely closer but it's also the ONE state primary in Battersea that middle class people compete to get their children into. You have to live v. v. close and there's no way ordinary families could afford the house prices. Or private rents.

How convenient that the bankers just happened to set up a secondary so close to the school the richest people in Battersea who are prepared to go state use. And using millions of pounds of public money to do it.

To be fair, we moved from near Falconbrook when ds was a baby as I knew we'd have problems with schooling in Battersea (and the borough as a whole). But we used our own money to buy a house elsewhere - didn't expect the taxpayer to give us millions to build a new school.

Belleville has a similar (or even better) reputation than Honeywell now. it also has a satellite school opening shortly which is very close to Wix. The catchment/ admissions areas overlap almost entirely, so that may be another factor in choosing the feeders (so geographically it's the same streets).

BTW, site selection hinged on the closure of the Bolingbrooke Hospital .

It's simply another way of getting money which is currently circulating in the public sector, out into the private sector and used to benefit people who already have all the advantages.

The healthcare reform is also designed to siphon money out of the public purse and into shareholders pockets.

IMO people of a certain mindset see all of the money sloshing around in the public sector which is not accessible to them, they see all this cash and they can't get at it and it drives them bananas. Naturally the conservative govt change the rules so that public money is accessible to the private sector. Problem with this approach is that pay and conditions for normal employees in the private sector are shitter than in the public sector, and the private sector is purely driven by the need for profit. So instead of the money circulating into the pockets of public sector workers in their pay and conditions, it goes into high salaries for a few people at the top and profit for shareholders.

Bottom line is that when I pay taxes I would rather it went into the pocket of an ordinary person employed in the public sector, in keeping their job secure etc, than to be taken in profit by a private company. Private companies get enough of my money already, and then they evade tax on it, put it offshore, decide to close UK operations and employ people in other countries instead. I want my tax money to be used for something different.