A child who lives next door to a primary has parents who do not understand which lies they must put on the application form in order to get their child in.
I think it ought ot be pretty much automatic that that child should go to that school unless there is a very good reason to the contrary – like for example, its parents want it to go to a different school.
Barbarasays
I have symathies with both sides, tbh. Don’t see there’s enough info to say whether or not this particular case is ridiculous, but it makes for a great news story.
Timsays
Well, the world has changed since I was a child. Back then (in the good old days) (cue music) (etc) not everybody had an enormous off-roader to load the children in to take them to a primary school miles from where they lived.
I think if I were this family I would point out that I couldn’t possibly take my child to the school two miles away on account of all the sodding great trucks parked outside my house every morning.
That’s “about a mile away” from the article. Given the journalistic tendency to hyerbole, I’d not be surprised if this meant “more than half, less than one”.
Back when I were a lad, from age six to be precise, I had a seven mile commute to/from school. [Not that there were SUVs involved. From age eight it was usually the number 23 bus.] YMDV 🙂
More to the point, there are a variety of criteria in play here, proximity being only one. Are you seriously arguing that, because some parents abuse it as a criterion, religious aspirations shouldn’t play a part in determining entry to blatantly CoE schools?
N.b. I’m treating this as a separate issue from either whether religious schools should be allowed to exist and the subsidiary issue of how they should then be funded.
Timsays
“Liam’s sister went to the school and he also attends a playgroup there.” This is a State school, why is the school assuming that the parents have different aspirations for their son than they had for their daughter.
Particularly with primary schools it seeme to me that there should be a presumption that a young child will go to the nearest primary school to their home and that this should be what happens unless there are exceptional circumstances.
I don’t think it is possible to separate the religious issue in the way you suggest. This is a State run primary school, C of E is the State religion, there are large tracts of the country where pretty much all the primary schools are C of E.
Barbarasays
So what happens when a religious education is more important than proximity? Maybe a family would be happy to walk child a mile to school or bus stop so that it could get a religious education, and it is so important that they would happily forgo the convenience of sending said child to the school on their doorstep? What happens to choice then? Is it not just as upsetting to this family to see the place go to a child who’s family is not interested in the religious aspect, and so the school two miles away would be just as appropriate? Or what abaout the family who already have a child there, who will now have to either move the first child, or have the inconvenience of dropping children off at two schools every morning, just so that a child who lives closer doesn’t have to bother going a little further?
Thank Goodness we HE, eh?
Timsays
As I said, I think that there should be a presumption that a child will go to the nearest State primary school to their home. If sectarianism means that this is going to be an unworkable presumption then we should do away with funding for sectarian schools.
I guess that it’s much more likely that the ambient demography has changed since the elder sibling’s time and not the criteria.
So if there is a private primary next door, a kid should be state funded to attend unless there are exceptional circumstances?
It’s not a secular state-funded school, it’s a CoE (partially) state-funded school. They are different. They have different historical roots and different setups. If they weren’t different, where does the parental dissembling you were refering to arise from?
The funding argument _is_ IMO a distinct matter:
a) Should the State fund religious schools?
b) Should religious schools use religious affiliation as an entrance criterion?
Question (a) seems to me to be worth debating.
(a) Should the State subsidise religious schools?
(b) Should religious schools be allowed to use religious affiliation as an entrance criterion?
(a) is the heart of the matter, but in Liam’s case not directly relevant unless you’ve either a journalistic or political axe to grind.
I guess that ambient demography has changed since the elder sibling attended the school rather than the school making assumptions about the parents’ stance on religion.
Barbarasays
This would certainly be one very obvious way round the problem. Don’t give anyone any choice at all, then no one can complain. 😉 I wonder what increased effect this would have on house prices?
Oh well. Nothing for it. I just have to assume a represive conspiracy…
Timsays
I don’t see that this removes choice at all. All I said was that there shouild be a presumption that a child will go to its nearest primary school, not that it should be compulsory. If this means that a child from further away cannot go to that school then there will be other choices available at more or less the same distance – I mean, once you have decided to drive your child to school it really doesn’t make any odds. And if parents want a sectarian school then they will have the option of paying for it.
Timsays
Oh and house prices are about to fall anyway.
Jaxsays
Comments regurgitated.
Sallysays
The criteria have changed. It used to be that the school gave out the places, its now done centrally by Kent LEA and the order of importance has changed. I’m not sure if its this year or last but I certainly knew about it. Yes its silly but that said I was aware when DS1 went to a church school that we were going to be low down on the list as they were grant-mantained and highest priority was regular church attendance with second highest being a practising member of another religion. However he got in, I got over wincing everytime I went into the hall and saw the artwork of the books of the bible and he thought it was cool to say prayers before lunch 😀 I can’t say I would be impressed if I lived next to a school and got told my child couldn’t attend it but they really should have read the form. It did explain the criteria very well imho.
Totally.
No, not on the face of it. Please explain…
A child who lives next door to a primary has parents who do not understand which lies they must put on the application form in order to get their child in.
I think it ought ot be pretty much automatic that that child should go to that school unless there is a very good reason to the contrary – like for example, its parents want it to go to a different school.
I have symathies with both sides, tbh. Don’t see there’s enough info to say whether or not this particular case is ridiculous, but it makes for a great news story.
Well, the world has changed since I was a child. Back then (in the good old days) (cue music) (etc) not everybody had an enormous off-roader to load the children in to take them to a primary school miles from where they lived.
I think if I were this family I would point out that I couldn’t possibly take my child to the school two miles away on account of all the sodding great trucks parked outside my house every morning.
That’s “about a mile away” from the article. Given the journalistic tendency to hyerbole, I’d not be surprised if this meant “more than half, less than one”.
Back when I were a lad, from age six to be precise, I had a seven mile commute to/from school. [Not that there were SUVs involved. From age eight it was usually the number 23 bus.] YMDV 🙂
More to the point, there are a variety of criteria in play here, proximity being only one. Are you seriously arguing that, because some parents abuse it as a criterion, religious aspirations shouldn’t play a part in determining entry to blatantly CoE schools?
N.b. I’m treating this as a separate issue from either whether religious schools should be allowed to exist and the subsidiary issue of how they should then be funded.
“Liam’s sister went to the school and he also attends a playgroup there.” This is a State school, why is the school assuming that the parents have different aspirations for their son than they had for their daughter.
Particularly with primary schools it seeme to me that there should be a presumption that a young child will go to the nearest primary school to their home and that this should be what happens unless there are exceptional circumstances.
I don’t think it is possible to separate the religious issue in the way you suggest. This is a State run primary school, C of E is the State religion, there are large tracts of the country where pretty much all the primary schools are C of E.
So what happens when a religious education is more important than proximity? Maybe a family would be happy to walk child a mile to school or bus stop so that it could get a religious education, and it is so important that they would happily forgo the convenience of sending said child to the school on their doorstep? What happens to choice then? Is it not just as upsetting to this family to see the place go to a child who’s family is not interested in the religious aspect, and so the school two miles away would be just as appropriate? Or what abaout the family who already have a child there, who will now have to either move the first child, or have the inconvenience of dropping children off at two schools every morning, just so that a child who lives closer doesn’t have to bother going a little further?
Thank Goodness we HE, eh?
As I said, I think that there should be a presumption that a child will go to the nearest State primary school to their home. If sectarianism means that this is going to be an unworkable presumption then we should do away with funding for sectarian schools.
I guess that it’s much more likely that the ambient demography has changed since the elder sibling’s time and not the criteria.
So if there is a private primary next door, a kid should be state funded to attend unless there are exceptional circumstances?
It’s not a secular state-funded school, it’s a CoE (partially) state-funded school. They are different. They have different historical roots and different setups. If they weren’t different, where does the parental dissembling you were refering to arise from?
The funding argument _is_ IMO a distinct matter:
a) Should the State fund religious schools?
b) Should religious schools use religious affiliation as an entrance criterion?
Question (a) seems to me to be worth debating.
B*gger*. WP ate my comment
Freddie Starr Ate My Comment! 🙂
(a) Should the State subsidise religious schools?
(b) Should religious schools be allowed to use religious affiliation as an entrance criterion?
(a) is the heart of the matter, but in Liam’s case not directly relevant unless you’ve either a journalistic or political axe to grind.
I guess that ambient demography has changed since the elder sibling attended the school rather than the school making assumptions about the parents’ stance on religion.
This would certainly be one very obvious way round the problem. Don’t give anyone any choice at all, then no one can complain. 😉 I wonder what increased effect this would have on house prices?
Argghh. It’s done it again….. grrrrr
Is it every other comment submission?
No. Oh well, I really can’t be arsed to type it in again. But it did conclusively resolve the issue. 😛
SOMETHING in what you typed is triggering a spam filter. No idea what it looked fine to me.
Oh well. Nothing for it. I just have to assume a represive conspiracy…
I don’t see that this removes choice at all. All I said was that there shouild be a presumption that a child will go to its nearest primary school, not that it should be compulsory. If this means that a child from further away cannot go to that school then there will be other choices available at more or less the same distance – I mean, once you have decided to drive your child to school it really doesn’t make any odds. And if parents want a sectarian school then they will have the option of paying for it.
Oh and house prices are about to fall anyway.
Comments regurgitated.
The criteria have changed. It used to be that the school gave out the places, its now done centrally by Kent LEA and the order of importance has changed. I’m not sure if its this year or last but I certainly knew about it. Yes its silly but that said I was aware when DS1 went to a church school that we were going to be low down on the list as they were grant-mantained and highest priority was regular church attendance with second highest being a practising member of another religion. However he got in, I got over wincing everytime I went into the hall and saw the artwork of the books of the bible and he thought it was cool to say prayers before lunch 😀 I can’t say I would be impressed if I lived next to a school and got told my child couldn’t attend it but they really should have read the form. It did explain the criteria very well imho.