Brighton votes to allocate secondary school places by lottery - good or bad?

[TheDullWitch]

Would you put your child's future down to pure chance because it's a fairer system?
here

I am pursuing a "head in sand" policy about this - but what are the schools like in Hove?

Blatchington Mill seems to be the better one in Hove.

Spidermama - "What's wrong with moving into an area because it has a good school nearby? I would have thought most parents take into account what schools are nearby when buying houses. "

Nothing. If you can afford to. If I bought a house in the catchment area of the 'good' school in my town I'd need to pay about 80k more for the same size house as I have now. Couldn't do it. So leaving it entirely up to catchment areas makes it another form of private education afaics. The less well off are buggered either way .

I think that local schools are more important when it comes to primary school when children are establishing friendships and prefer to be in familiar territory. But by the time they hit their teens they have friends and have more independence. Most kids I know here walk or cycle to school.

Pollyanna I think B Mill is the best one near you.I do think that mixes of people will improve more schools but just can't see it happening here as most people who want the schools are already living in the area.I think the Preston Park schools will change atatus and run their own show and then local 'donations'(bribes?)etc will come into play.There are some v inexpensive areas to live near these schools but most people don't want to live there for other reasons such as the houses aren't as nice

Norksbride, my children go to two different primary schools because ds goes to a SN one. We missed ds's last parents' evening because it was the same evening as dd's and last time they had sports days I went to ds's and dh went to dd's. It was a shame really.

Unquietdad, I know a Brighton counciller (well used to, not seen her for a couple of years) and her grandchildren went here .

We're not in Brighton, but we are in East Sussex. My nearest secondary schools are 4 miles, 8 miles and 12 miles away. There are no school buses or other public transport where I live.

I understand some peoples desire for schools to have mixed-ability children and mixed-class parents but this was also the case when I went to school in the 70s/80s. My parents did the 'right thing' and I had a crap education as a result. Why should I do the same to my children, 30years on, when it's Government money that should be improving schools, not other peoples children?

Community involvement is fine. But it's not enough. Good teachers cost money. Schools should have kept their playing fields. They shouldn't have to raise money by having vending machines in the hallways.

Just my 2p that sibling rule should always be applied at primary school but definitely not at secondary school Part of growing up is learning how to make your own way around using public transport etc. Even though I will be able to take dd to secondary school when she starts in September I will only do this for a short settling in period and then will be leaving her to make her own way there and back.

Not really sure where I stand on the lottery ... devil and the deep blue sea springs to mind ... although the fact that one councillor was deselected from the committee that made the decision makes me fume.

And I second NorksBrides 2nd & 3rd paragraphs. I too had a crap education in the comprehensive system and would be a big deficit in the "value added" column for my secondary school if tables had existed at the time. (Scored 100% in 11+ tests but parents wanted me to go to the same school as my sister and didn't believe in selective education)

thank god at last a thread where I can say my bit.
this doesn't affect me as ds is in secondary. but what Brighton is doing is Wrong with a capital W.
Before things weren't good but at least the kids from the poorer areas stood a chance of getting into one of the better schools. now they have no chance. all of moulscoombe/bevendean and the coombe road area will be under the same not very good school. and all of whitehawk will be in another school. so instead of mixing rich and poor. they have now divided them. on the news this didn't get a mention and much was made of areas have 2 schools to choose from BULLSHIT that is only one well off are the rest have NO choice.
sorry if I have repeated what anyone else has said but haven;t yet read whole thr

oh and by the way most children will still be bussing to school and you have to pay not council

Agree 2shoes. The current system in Brighton is unfair with secondary schools distributed unevenly around the city.
However the council has now replaced an unfair system with another unfair system brought about by political expediency. The pressure for change has come from middle class parents who live some distance away from the popular schools. They feel that they should have greater access to these schools. Labour and the Greens are keen to hold on to power in these key marginal wards and so have devised a system which enables them greater access to these schools.
The parents from the most deprived estates and areas in the city will now have no choice. They will not be in the catchment areas for the most popular schools.They will not be given a place in the lottery. I am fuming at the way this issue has been presented in the media. If it truly was a fair lottery I wouldn't object.But I do object to the way the Labour group backed by the Greens have been so keen to win the support of two marginal wards they have created a system in which the poorest parents have no choice and their schools will become ghettos of deprivation.
The way these proposals were pushed through was completely undemocractic with both Labour and the Greens removing their representatives who dissented at the last minute to replace them with people who followed the party line.
Sorry,rant over-as you may guess I'm feeling rather angry!

ArcticRoll to me the media has just picked up on the lottery part of it. and seem to think everyone will have some kind of choice. if you live in east brighton you are not going to be near any secondry school. I also thing Brighton will pay for this as time goes on. the school that will be affected most by this change has been doing a lot better. But now all it's intake will be from the poorer part of town just crazy.
I Think the council have let a large part of brighton down and feel very sorry for parents who now will have no choice as to where there children will go.
when ds moved up we didn't get our first choice but at least we got our second.

but atm can the parents in Whitehawk get their kids into Varndean/Stringer?

I thought the new system split Whitehawk down the middle, to distribute the number of children entitled to free school meals, as well as other factors.

So half will go to Varndean/Stringer and half to Falmer?

Where do kids in Moulsecoomb go under the new system?

Quietmouse-Currently some children from Whitehawk go to Varndean.
Under the new system the majority of parents from Whitehawk will have no choice. They will be in the single catchment area of Longhill.
Equally the parents of Mouslecoombe will only have one choice: Falmer. The council had a chance to create a much fairer system but instead sort to placate a minority of middle class parents in key marginal wards.They have behaved in an appalling manner and the most deprived areas of the city will lose out.

i do find it odd that the elm grove are has been left out of the falmer/longhill catchment(cam't remember if they got varndean or ds)

OrmIrian, there are ways and means. I'm in a posh-ish area but my home is worth approx 80-100k less than comparable homes in the same area as I live on a busy road with the railway at the back. Great primary school though so DH has been putting in single glazing and up fixing the roof (can't afford to get roofers) so that we can live here.

It's all about compromise.

Even so I don't resent my richer neighbours. They work hard. They've made certain choices. It's not all about luck and I resent that the middle classes, who can't quite afford to be educated privately, are the ones who have to make all the concessions.

It reminds me of how cleverer kids are ignored and left to stew because there's not point in putting in the time to help them fulfill their potential - Teachers instead spend their limited time on helping the strugglers. It's very unfashionable to complain about this but surely every child has the right to get a decent shot at fulfilling their potential.

A bit of a ramble, but there's something bothering me about some of the attitudes on this thread. The sort of 'Ha ha, those smug, middle class parents deserve all they get' sort of thing.

"However the council has now replaced an unfair system with another unfair system brought about by political expediency. The pressure for change has come from middle class parents who live some distance away from the popular schools. They feel that they should have greater access to these schools. Labour and the Greens are keen to hold on to power in these key marginal wards and so have devised a system which enables them greater access to these schools".
Spot on Arctic roll.

I agree with you about the tone of this thread Spidermama but it is a reflection of the way the media have reported the story - if you live in brighton you know the complexities of the situation.

I do resent people saying that the people in brighton complaining do nothing about the state of the education system though. One of the reasons the schools in my area are so good is the involvement of the parents in the schools their kids go to. What more can you do (except use your vote wisely which I will certainly be doing in May).

I couldn't agree more spider.That attitude stinks.

sm - i made the comment about smug parents and I clarified what I meant. well I thought I did anyway. I did not say that middleclass parents deserve what they get far from it. the smug parents are i refer to are those who abuse the system to get their child into the school of their choice, believing that their child has more right to a better eduction than 'jo jones' down the road. That smugness applies to people of all classes and demoninations.

denominations even.

well I know who I won't be voting for

this says it all

Thanks for that link, Unquietdad.

I know it will get me shot down in flames, but social mobility was so much greater when we had grammar schools. My mother grew up in a maisonette in Silvertown, never went to university but is one of her industry's leading experts and has been honoured by her country for services to the industry. The comprehensive system didn't improve schools, it just made more of them mediocre. The problem wasn't with the grammar schools, it was with the lack of aspirations of the Secondary Modern schools and the fact you couldn't move work your way up from one to the other.

as a grammar school boy I agree entirely!

Good link unquietdad.