Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Goodrich? It's, like, two minute's walk away! How big is the catchment area for g**dness sake.

My thoughts are with you both!! What a horrid situation.


My two are a couple of years away from school - but if it turns out Ryedale is a black hole I won't be Ryedalema for much longer I can tell you.

Tor yes it is me...we have been offered Bessemer Grange. Don't even know where it is. Yes it's wine o'clock in my house now. Especially as have just found out that BA are striking so my long weekend of luxury with my husband which we booked a year ago is now off. Pales into insignificance in comparison though


Ryedalema - my boys are 4 and 2 and a half


Fuschia yes it's my closest school - am on Ryedale but at the Forest Hill Rd end


I have just spoken to Victoria our new councillor - she told me to email all my details to peckhamryelabour@hotmail.com the labour group are meeting tonight and she will try to find out as much as possible for me. Obviously they have just taken over so everything is up in the air.


Am completely shellshocked

Hi prdarling

I was in exactly the same boat as you last year. We didn't get any of our choices and were allocated Bessemer Grange. The school is at the bottom of Red Post Hill. It is about a mile from our house. Regardless, that is where our daughter is now at school and she absolutely loves it and is thriving there. Personally, I am really happy with the school. I can pm you if you wany any further info.

We didn't get a place at any of our 4 choices last year but did end up in our favourite school eventually - 2 weeks after term started. We were initially 7th on the list. My advice would be to find out where you are on the waiting list and then to make yourself known to the person in charge of the school office and keep in regular touch with them. Things do change a lot between now and when term starts but it is a really really horrible wait!


I think hardly anyone wins an appeal.

clux my son isn't due to start till January so maybe there is hope but I am very very upset and stressed


wiz i'm glad to hear your daughter and you are happy wih the school - that's reassuring but I just can't get past not being able to go to a school which is 2 minutes walk from my house. It seems ludicrous that hundreds of parents drive to Goodrich from God knows where and I would have to drive to BG.

Page 22 for lAT YEAR'S CRITERIA (FINAL?)


gOODRICH HAD 90 PLACES LAST YEAR

38 SIBLINGS

3 Special needs

iT SEEMS TO SAY 1 place was issued on distance criteria, 683m from the school (last yr rule was shortest safe walking journey, this yr distances will be shorter as rule is as the crow flies)


If that's correct guess all pupils for whom it was the closest school did get a place, and that would have been 90-38-3-1 = 48 places. As there are 60 places this year, you might surmise only 18 would have got in, everything else being equal... but I would guess there would be more siblings due to the larger existing school population since the bulge class. If there were again 48 pupils for whom it was the closest school, that would be 30 unsuccessful applicants...

Just to confirm, Goodrich actually took in 4 classes last year (two in September and two for the January in take) so they had 120 reception children (09/10). This year they won't have a bulge class but will still be taking their usual 90 children (3 classes) again spread over two start times (September and January).

malcol Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Just to confirm, Goodrich actually took in 4

> classes last year (two in September and two for

> the January in take) so they had 120 reception

> children (09/10). This year they won't have a

> bulge class but will still be taking their usual

> 90 children (3 classes) again spread over two

> start times (September and January).



That's odd then.. why does the booklet give data for the allocation of just 90 places? Guess it's all just rubbish then!!

Possibly it was compiled before the bulge class was agreed or perhaps it makes it easier to stick with the normal 90 places so as not to confuse people who may think that 120 is their normal intake amount. I can assure you though that this academic year (09/10) they took in 4 classes amounting to 120 children and next year it will be 3 classes.

malcol Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Possibly it was compiled before the bulge class

> was agreed or perhaps it makes it easier to stick

> with the normal 90 places so as not to confuse

> people who may think that 120 is their normal

> intake amount. I can assure you though that this

> academic year (09/10) they took in 4 classes

> amounting to 120 children and next year it will be

> 3 classes.


It would be useful for parents to clarify how the places were allocated last year and this year and for the nonsiblings how far from the school the net was cast...

Info re infant appeals:


"Appeals Involving Infant Class Sizes (Reception, Year 1 and Year 2 Classes)


There are separate and different rules for appeals which involve limiting infant class sizes to a maximum of 30 pupils. Apart from some very limited exceptions, no infant class may contain more than 30 pupils being taught by one teacher. Any admissions which would increase a class to more than 30 pupils would require what are called 'qualifying measures', such as organising an extra class, appointing an additional teacher, providing an additional classroom or introducing or extending mixed age group teaching.


When the Local Authority can show to an Appeals Panel that any further admissions would require qualifying measures your appeal could be upheld only if the appeals Panel decided either that


a mistake had been made in the allocation of places according to the admissions criteria which had deprived your child of a place and if the criteria had been applied correctly your child would have received that place, or

the child would have been offered a place if the arrangements had not been contrary to mandatory provisions in the School Admissions Code and the School Standards and Framework Act 1998, or

that the decision to refuse admission was 'unreasonable' in the circumstances of the case. 'Unreasonable' as defined by the Courts is construed as being perverse or irrational and is a very high threshold for an appeal to be successful.

"

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Surprised at how many people take the 'oooh it's great it got approved, something is better than nothing' view. This is exactly Southwark council's approach, pandering to greedy developers for the absolute bare minimum of social and affordable housing. It's exactly why, under their leadership, only a fraction of social and affordable housing has been built in the borough - weirdly Mccash chose to highlight their own failures in his 'near unprecedented' (yet unbiased 😆) submission. All the objectors i have met support redevelopment, to benefit those in need of homes and the community - not change it forever. The council could and should be bolder, demand twice the social and affordable housing in these schemes, and not concede to 8 storeys of unneeded student bedsits. If it is a question of viability, publically disclose the business plan to prove how impossible it might be to turn a profit. Once the thing is built these sites can never be used for social or affordable housing. The council blows every opportunity, every time. Its pathetic. Developers admitted the scale was, in this instance, not required for viability. The student movements data seemed completely made up. The claim that 'students are taking up private rentals' was backed up with no data. There is empty student housing on denmark hill, needs to be fixed up but it's there already built. The council allows developers years to build cosy relationships with planners such that the final decision is a formality - substantiated objections are dismissed with wooly words and BS. Key meetings and consultations are scheduled deliberately to garner minimal engagement or objection. Local councillors, who we fund, ignore their constituents concerns. Those councillors that dare waiver in the predetermination are slapped down. Not very democratic. They've removed management and accountability by having no nomination agreement with any of the 'many london universities needing accommodation' - these direct lets MAKE MORE MONEY. A privately run firm will supposedly ensure everyone that those living there is actually a student and adheres to any conduct guidelines. There's no separation to residents - especially to ones on their own development. Could go on... We'll see how many of the 53 social/affordable units that we're all so happy to have approved actually get built. 
    • I am looking for 1 unit which is working for £50 cash. Thank you
    • Can’t recommend the company enough, great service. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...