Change Notre Dame High School from girls only

[Glasgowlassie]

I have 2 children, currently at Notre Dame Primary in Glasgow. I have only just discovered, due to a recent campaign that my son and daughter will not be able to go to the same High School.

Girls are enrolled into Notre Dame High School, an all girls high school, this is state funded and a total anomaly, the only one of its kind in Scotland. My daughter must go there unless I can get her into another local school via a placing request, becoming increasingly difficult in the West End.

My son has to go to the linked school 3 miles away, St Thomas Aquinas, if I can't get him into another school which is closer.

Over 75% of the girls in this girls only school come from a distance via placing request. So this has an impact on the local community and the environment.

There is a campaign to change this which is how I became aware that my children would not even be allowed to go to St Thomas Aquinas without a placing request for my daughter.

In 2018 there is no place for an all girls school as it is discriminatory. Schools should serve their local area first.

Campaign is here for anyone that is interested and wants to help change it. Particularly people from Glasgow.

www.ndh4all.net

caoraich I'm not Catholic either. I picked ND on the basis that I liked the school, liked the ethos and it had the aftercare provision that I needed. I also wasn't that enamoured with Hyndland primary, it just seemed so cramped!

I don't have a particular issue with the amount that God comes into the school day, I guess im used to it now. I wish I had paid a bit more attention to the concept of listed schools though. Cleveden isn't my catchment school, its Hyndland which is a better school. But it's unlikely that we'd get a place, which would be fine as long as both my kids went to St Thomas together.

Even if my kids do get into school together, it doesn't change the fact that the current situation is unfair. Single sex education doesn't have a place being paid for by taxpayers. It does need to change but it seems that there's so many ex pupils of NDHS who seem to think that because they went there and they liked it, its a justification for it to stay the same.

Agent the changes that GCC has made to schools in the west end, and all over Glasgow really, is appalling. They have been detrimental to the local children but they just don't seem to care. I am hoping that for once they will be forced to do something which has a positive impact on local children and schools but who knows....

@Glasgowlassie - my understanding is that girls, in particular, benefit from single sex schools, because they feel more able to speak up in class when there are no boys in the class - generally, it is a better educational environment for them.

A 2015 study H reported here in the Guardian) showed that girls at single sex schools got better GCSE results than those in co-ed schools, and that this advantage may not just apply to the high achievers, it might act across the spectrum, so a girl who had been educationally disadvantaged at primary school would improve more in a single sex school than a co-ed one, though those results were less clear cut.

So, if Notre Dame becomes co-ed, this could be worse, educationally, for your dd than if it stayed single sex - and I don’t know if there would be any corresponding improvement in education for your son - there are conflicting theories. One says that boys do better in co-ed schools because of the good example set by girls (but the study reported in the Guardian would suggest that this is at the expense of the girls’ education), and another suggests boys also do better in single sex schools.

No G12 issue whatsoever it’s my bit.i know it v well to extent I’ll use mirth
And yes parents I do know,do debate whether to move out to east REN or east Dunbartonshire’s
I’m somewhat surprised this has caught by surprise and your lack of forward planning
Your solution is to change the school to co-ed.as I said that’ll require consultation
Planning consent
Scheduled building work
All exceeding your time frame
You’re nippy to anyone putting a contrary view

I do understand what you are saying Glasgowlassie - I am comparing what you are saying to what happens in my area where there is a similarly very high demand for secondary school places. A friend whose child went to the local RC primary chose to send him to the catchment secondary and he got a place, as did all of his friends, ahead of all other placing requests from any children who lived out of catchment, even with siblings already in school. Catchment children come first.

However, you seem very fixed on the idea that a school which has been girls only since the year dot should all of a sudden change its intake rules to suit you. You KNEW Notre Dame was girls only. You actively chose to send your kids to the feeder primary anyway. Now you are dealing with the consequences of that decision and you are expecting the entire system to change to suit you.

Debates about whether single sex education is right/wrong or whether denominational schools are right/wrong is a red herring - this is purely about a parent kicking off because her decisions for P1 places are coming back to bite her.

Not nippy to everyone at all lipstick. It's just your posts which seem to have a tone to them and that I called you out for. You've mentioned your surprise at my planning or lack of on every post, its like you take it personally.

I've also explained that it's not my petition, that I know it requires consultation and I'm well aware that it will likely exceed my timeframe but you keep repeating this in your posts.

I support this change for all the local children, especially the ones at NDPS who like my children
currently have no right to transition to high school together. I am impacted by it but even if I wasn't I would still be supporting the campaign because it's discrimanatory and negatively impacts the children who are local to the area.

Thanks for your comments though.

I have fairly unpopular (on this thread anyway) views on this whole thing about schools etc.

For me every child should have the option of a place at their local non-denominational co-ed school. That should be the standard. If there is demand then I don't have any problem with Catholic/single sex/specialist language schools being there. All children are entitled to an education and as long as the cost is broadly the same then that's fine. However anyone choosing to apply for and take a space in one should be responsible for their own transport and the costs associated with that.

The public should not be funding the life choices of parents.

School places for children with a disability/special need are obviously the exception.

I say this as a parent who has chosen to send my children out of catchment (and pay for that choice).

k2p you weren't just explaining how it worked in your area though, you were telling me how I should proceed and my response back to you was expaining again why it wasn't as simple as that.

I have already explained several times that my children won't benefit from any proposed change because of the length if time it would likely take, so your comment about me being fixed on an idea to suit me is completely wrong.

I didn't set up the petition, I am not involved in the campaign and I've explained how it came about so to accuse me of kicking off is rather silly.

I want this change in order to benefit the local children, the ones who NDHS is meant to serve first. It is a catchment school, it is meant to serve the needs of the catchment first, it is clearly failing at that.

NDHS does have a long history, that isnt going to be obliterated with the entry of boys and doesn't mean that it can't change. In fact, it needs to change because it isn't meeting the needs of the local people. If it doesn't change, with the falling school roll (it is only 2/3 full)it may not survive.

For me the debate absolutely IS about single sex education and the inequalities it is creating in this situation. So even though it won't change my situation or benefit my children I will support the campaign because the current situation is discriminatory.

I'm very surprised that you wouldn't be entitled to a place at the non-denom school living in catchment.

What happens to S1 age children moving into the area who by definition didn't attend a feeder primary?

I think in the short term you might be more successful campaigning that your children should be entitled to access any HS that you live in catchment for.

It does illustrate the issue with west end school capacity though. The primary size problems are just catching up with the HS.

OP I'm in the same boat as you and totally agree. I didn't go to school in glasgow so had no previous experience of the dom/non-dom system here. When my oldest son was starting primary school we chose Notre Dame Primary because it's a great school on our doorstep. We assumed that our kids would go to Hyndland High because it's also spitting distance from our house. There was no information given to us to say that because we'd chosen a denominational primary school we had no right to a place in the local non-dom high school even though we're in catchment. We didn't find out until our oldest was in p4 and youngest had also started at NDP. If I had known we would definitely have sent them to Hyndland Primary.

This didn't used to be an issue. 10 years ago NDP kids were pretty much guaranteed a place in Hyndland or Hillhead high on placing request and that's where most of them went. It's different now. School rolls in the area have skyrocketed and both of those high schools are jam packed. Placing requests are being refused on the grounds of lack of capacity. My son is in P5 now amd asking which high school he will go to and if he can go to the same one as his friends. I don't have an answer for him.

Your children can go to the same high school. It's just it wouldn't be Notre Dame High School. It's not a new phenomenon. Most parents with children attending the primary know the high school is single sex. If they want to keep brothers and sisters together, they opt for St Thomas Aquinas or John Paul Academy. But most, separate the siblings so they girls can benefit from a single sex education.

The current situation isn't discriminatory. Actually it allows low income children to benefit from single -sex education when all the other single-sex options are in fee-paying schools. It allows girls whose religion prohibits their contact with members of the opposite sex, to participate fully in a school environment. It is also a tiny little haven where girls can feel as though they've opted out of all the patriarchal nonsense that says they shouldn't study science or wood work or be good at maths.

Single sex education benefits girls. Campaigning to let boys into the school will only disadvantage girls. It makes me wonder why you value your son's convenience over your daughter's education.

Oh, and you said:
St Patrick's was amalgamated with Notre Dame Primary years ago
That is incorrect. St Patrick's is a completely different school from Notre Dame Primary.

My daughter's education would not be affected by having boys in her class. It's not the job of a local authority school to cater for minority religious views, particularly those that limit a girls contact with the opposite sex.
A state funded catchment school has a duty first and foremost to meet the needs of the children in it's local community. Notre Dame High is struggling to attract local children despite being in the middle of an area where a capacity crisis is looming. Only 28% of the kids attending are catchment and that number is on a downward trend. Why aren't pushy west end parents clammoring to get their kids into one of the best schools in Glasgow? It's because there's no local appetite for single sex schooling. Notre Dame High is not meeting the needs of it's local community as it should.

Fraying st Peters was amalgamated with Notre Dame when they both moved into the new building on Havelock St.

'Pushy west end parents', to use your words, are looking at the socio-economic group ( as they do when dismissing St Thomas Aquinas') and have decided they would rather try to create a more rarified high school environment hence their distress at placing requests taking spaces at NDHS and their upset at having to consider St Thomas' .

Statistically your DD's education is impacted by having boys in her class. There are numerous studies that support single-sex education. You should probably read them.

It's depressing and predictable that rather than campaign for a new school or different catchment rules, certain parents think girls should just move over and accommodate boys. Ask yourself why that is always the solution. Your campaign could just as easily be directed at catchments or school provision but instead you're focusing on reducing the options for girl's education in Glasgow.

But the PP said St Patrick's not St Peter's. St Patrick's is a different school whose DCs also attend NDHS.

Fraying and sleepyhead surprising as it may be, currently my boy/girl children and others like them from ND primary CANNOT go to the same school together without a placing request. The fact that they are in the catchment area for that school doesnt matter. Even with a placing request, a place is unlikely due to increasing school rolls.

The current situation IS discrimatory, it disadvantages boys and girls from the local area. As to the point about single sex education benefitting girls, there are studies showing that single sex education is not better for either sex. ND performs on a par with nearby co-ed schools and infact some of those schools have better results.

It also does not benefit "low income children"
it benefits only some girls, not necessarily low income ones. In fact, it is disadvantaging the local girls whose needs it should be meeting first, the majority if whom go elsewhere.
Opening up to boys would allow boys from low income families to benefit from being educated there.

We should not be encouraging parents of "girls who's religion prohibits contact with the opposite sex" to be cloistered in single sex schools. We should be encouraging people to integrate and to go out into the world and succeed, including these girls. How will this happen if we are encouraging segregation of females in the school environment and perpetuating the idea that they cannot mix? As a Muslim and a member of the religion you are obviously referring to here, I can tell you that my religion doesnt prohibit contact with males, this is an ingrained cultural attitude that we should be discouraging, not encouraging.

To suggest that I am disadvantaging my daughter for the benefit of my son's convenience is a pretty ignorant remark. How dare you suggest that I would prioritise one child over another. AGAIN THIS CHANGE WONT HAPPEN IN TIME TO BENEFIT MY CHILDREN.

Notre Dame High Schools roll is not falling. The S1 intake last August was the biggest for many years, they even had to create a new class to accommodate them.

They may be beneath their maximum number but that's in the upper years of the school.

Additionally Catholic pupils are in the minority at Notre Dame, there are a significantly higher percentage of non catholic pupils attending actually.

It's the number of catchment kids that's falling within that roll. NDH is only two thirds full despite being 3rd in league tables for the whole of Glasgow and sitting in the middle of the West end where neighbouring schools are bursting at the seams.

Using caps doesn't denote a better argument.
NDHS is the only single-sex non-fee-paying school in Glasgow. This obviously benefits low-income children who cannot afford to pay for single-sex education. It's a statement of fact. Your emotion surrounding it does not change the facts.

Your comparison to local co-ed schools without taking into the socio-economic demographic of their cohort is not a reasonable comparison to make. Of course, a local co-ed school with a cohort drawn from the West end will perform better than a school with a cohort from a mixed socio-economic demographic. On the IMD, Hillhead is 2000 points better than some of the areas that provide pupils for NDHS. The outcomes for the individual children are better at single sex schools. This has been proven time and time again.

So, I come back to my question: why are you campaigning to take options from girls rather than campaigning for a change to catchment rules or/and provision?

Fraying - of course this isn't a new thing. Does that mean it can never be challenged? Do we always have to accept the status quo? Times move on. I thought we were living in an inclusive country where we don't discriminate against gender, religion, race? If this situation was reversed and it was a boys school we woudn't even be having a discussion about it - it would've been changed years ago. At the end of the day, Notre Dame High is a school like any other with a catchment. It is not a 'city-wide' school as some like to claim. As such, it should serve the needs of the local catchment and community first and foremost. Something that it fails to do at the moment - for both girls and boys living in the area.

St thomas A is 3 miles away with no direct bus or train. I'm frustrated that I can't send my kids to their local school.

It has long been proven that girls fare better in single sex schools. It is not discriminatory to have single sex provision. Stop bandying the word around as if it is a legal magic wand. It is perfectly fine and right for there to be single sex education.

Sorry but that is simply not true. Meta analysis of single sex schooling shows that it makes no difference to educational outcomes.

Sorry I don't agree it is fine and right for there to be state funded single sex education. There is no other single sex state funded school in the whole of Scotland - does that not say something?! I don't know anyone who would be happy to send their boy or girl to a single sex school. It is not reflective of the world we live in.