Head Teacher appointed for The Charter School East Dulwich

[grabot]

Agree wholeheartedly with DuncanW.

[hpsaucey]

DuncanW Wrote:

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

> Congratulations to all those involved in the

> Charter bid - This is great news.

>

> Well done and thank you also to those who led and

> contributed to the Habs bid. This was my preferred

> choice, but only by a a narrow margin.

>

> With regards to the admissions criteria, I'm not

> sure I have understood the argument for a nodal

> criteria properly. In terms of there being a black

> hole to the east of Lordship Lane, are these areas

> not now served by the two Harris schools? I

> understand that although these schools are both

> rated outstanding, they are not everyone's first

> choice for varying reasons. So if it's about

> choice, how does the choice of one family impact

> on the choice/options of another family who would

> like that school (the new Charter), live close to

> it, but miss out in favour of someone who lives

> further from the school but closer to a notional

> nodal point? Am I missing something?

>

> Edited to correct typo

In terms of the Harris (girls - anyone know if the Boys school is considering similar changes??) schools this is not so clearcut. See here for example on a recent proposal by Harris Girls to potentially move away from distance based admissions to a lottery:

http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?29,1454442,page=1

HP

[kristymac1]

my support was always for a non-faith, co-ed local secondary school which had the vision to serve the local community - this doesn't exist to the east of Lordship Lane. There are many smart ways to consider fair admission, nodal points (or a number of nodal points) is, I believe fairer than 'as the crow flies' which would result in a number of households being covered by the distance admissions policy for both Charter schools - so yes a few children would have a legitimate choice, Charter 1 or Charter 2 or Harris' or Sydenham Girls or Forest Hill boys, however, the majority would be left with the non-choice (imo) of single sex only.

The hospital site was selected as being the ONLY site possible for a new secondary school NOT because it was located in the area of greatest need. If the only available site was next door to 'Charter 1', would you advocate there being an identical 'as the crow flies' admission? it is not completely irrelevant where the school is positioned (it should still be a school serving the local community), but measuring the admissions from a point which was forced on the campaign (as the only location) rather than a location of greatest need seems to lack consideration and any creative thinking.

[Dulwich Born And Bred]

I like the idea of various nodal points and I would be in favour of that , currently I would be in catchment of Charter 2 but I'm not in catchment of Charter 1 so not all of us in catchment of Charter 2 have the option of other schools too .

[Lordship]

Congratulations to the Charter on the new school.

I am right in thinking that both Charter schools would need to have the same admission policy as they belong to the same federation of schools?

If the new school moved away from the distance based admissions policy would the orginal Charter school also need to change it's admissions policy?

Edited for typo

[colabottle]

It's fantastic news that East Dulwich is getting a new secondary school, and a huge congratulations to the Haberdasher's team that started this whole process - without them, this wouldn't have happened.

Going forward I am heartened to hear from Charter that they will consider the views of local parents when considering their admissions policy. I live at the top end of East Dulwich, near Barry Road/Lordship Lane, and am currently outside the current Charter catchment. I have a boy and a girl and want them both to go to the same school, locally. Can I make an early plea to Charter that your admissions policy will genuinely reflect the local need, and that the sdmissions policy will not simply extend the current Charter catchment - leaving some lucky children with the choice of two co-ed locals, and some with none.

[colabottle]

kristymac1 Wrote:

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

> my support was always for a non-faith, co-ed local

> secondary school which had the vision to serve the

> local community - this doesn't exist to the east

> of Lordship Lane. There are many smart ways to

> consider fair admission, nodal points (or a number

> of nodal points) is, I believe fairer than 'as the

> crow flies' which would result in a number of

> households being covered by the distance

> admissions policy for both Charter schools - so

> yes a few children would have a legitimate choice,

> Charter 1 or Charter 2 or Harris' or Sydenham

> Girls or Forest Hill boys, however, the majority

> would be left with the non-choice (imo) of single

> sex only.

> The hospital site was selected as being the ONLY

> site possible for a new secondary school NOT

> because it was located in the area of greatest

> need. If the only available site was next door to

> 'Charter 1', would you advocate there being an

> identical 'as the crow flies' admission? it is not

> completely irrelevant where the school is

> positioned (it should still be a school serving

> the local community), but measuring the admissions

> from a point which was forced on the campaign (as

> the only location) rather than a location of

> greatest need seems to lack consideration and any

> creative thinking.

I completely agree.

[Otta]

When we're talking about primary schools, I'm all for people that live close by getting places.

But when we're talking about secondary schools I really don't think distance should have too much to do with it. Secondary school kids should be perfectly able to get a bus to school independently (unless they have a SEN).

Those that live close to the new Charter will also live close to the original one. Thos that live in a black spot will still live in a black spot.

Although I do wonder why people are so keen to avoid the Harris secondaries.

[James Barber]

Hi Lordship,

Don't believe they have to have same admissions policies. They will be different schools. But I would imagine economies and less chance of error if they share the same admissions policies.

[kristymac1]

Lordship Wrote:

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

> Congratulations to the Charter on the new school.

> I am right in thinking that both Charter schools

> would need to have the same admission policy as

> they belong to the same federation of schools?

> If the new school moved away from the distance

> based admissions policy would the orginal Charter

> school also need to change it's admissions

> policy?

>

> Edited for typo

if this were to be the case, Charter 1 could simply introduce a nodal point to measure distance admissions from its front door! That said, measuring from a nodal point(s) is still distance based criteria, it simply recognises that the location of the school is governed by available space not immediate local need.

[Lordship]

Congratulations to the Charter on the new school this is great news for East Dulwich.

I am right in thinking that both Charter schools would need to have the same admission policy as they belong to the same federation of schools?

If the new school moved away from the distance based admissions policy would the orginal Charter school also need to change it's admissions policy?

[Dulwich Born And Bred]

Not true Otta. I'd be in catchment of Charter 2 but not 1 .

Otta Wrote:

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

> When we're talking about primary schools, I'm all

> for people that live close by getting places.

>

> But when we're talking about secondary schools I

> really don't think distance should have too much

> to do with it. Secondary school kids should be

> perfectly able to get a bus to school

> independently (unless they have a SEN).

>

> Those that live close to the new Charter will also

> live close to the original one. Thos that live in

> a black spot will still live in a black spot.

>

> Although I do wonder why people are so keen to

> avoid the Harris secondaries.

[littlek1cker]

Hi Lordship,

Lordship Wrote:

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

> I am right in thinking that both Charter schools

> would need to have the same admission policy as

> they belong to the same federation of schools?

> If the new school moved away from the distance

> based admissions policy would the orginal Charter

> school also need to change it's admissions

> policy?

As far as I am aware, each school within a federation can have its own admissions policy. Whatever policy is decided for the new school will not directly affect the existing Charter school. Any change to the existing Charter school policy would be subject to local consultation.

[Otta]

I know, my point really is that at secondary age (when kids should be able to catch a bus on their own) distance shouldn't be a factor IMO.

But it is so I'll shut up.

[DuncanW]

Otta - Speaking only for myself, I do have a concern over the admissions criteria, but it's not based on my kids' ability to get on a bus.

[Lordship]

Thank you littlek1cker for the clarification on the existing Charter admission policy.

[tiddles]

Otta - I think most people would prefer a co-ed school- the Harris Crystal Palace is very oversubscribed.

[Otta]

Yeah maybe. In fact more than likely.

But threads on this forum in the past have suggested that there is a bit of snobbery going on with some people too.

[MsMaz]

colabottle Wrote:

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

> kristymac1 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > my support was always for a non-faith, co-ed

> local

> > secondary school which had the vision to serve

> the

> > local community - this doesn't exist to the

> east

> > of Lordship Lane. There are many smart ways to

> > consider fair admission, nodal points (or a

> number

> > of nodal points) is, I believe fairer than 'as

> the

> > crow flies' which would result in a number of

> > households being covered by the distance

> > admissions policy for both Charter schools - so

> > yes a few children would have a legitimate

> choice,

> > Charter 1 or Charter 2 or Harris' or Sydenham

> > Girls or Forest Hill boys, however, the

> majority

> > would be left with the non-choice (imo) of

> single

> > sex only.

> > The hospital site was selected as being the

> ONLY

> > site possible for a new secondary school NOT

> > because it was located in the area of greatest

> > need. If the only available site was next door

> to

> > 'Charter 1', would you advocate there being an

> > identical 'as the crow flies' admission? it is

> not

> > completely irrelevant where the school is

> > positioned (it should still be a school serving

> > the local community), but measuring the

> admissions

> > from a point which was forced on the campaign

> (as

> > the only location) rather than a location of

> > greatest need seems to lack consideration and

> any

> > creative thinking.

>

> I completely agree.

Yes, I agree here, too. The actual site of the school is not completely reflective of where the need/support lies. Haberdashers' heat map clearly shows support/need north-east, east and south-east of the Dulwich hospital site. Maybe the new Charter 2 could go in those directions from the edge of its Charter 1 catchment, for example.

[workingmum]

We live on dog kennel hill and wouldn't get in to charter 1 but would stand a good chance of getting into charter 2.

This area has been a blackspot as far as secondary school admissions go, lots of current yr 6 kids ending up with places in walworth so this is fantastic news.

The whole Harris single sex vs co ed thing is irrelevant for us as we wouldn't stand a chance of getting into them anyway.

As far as the habs heat map goes, I haven't seen it but I did hear that the charter bid got more than double the number of signatures despite the campaign starting later.

[sophiesofa]

Congratulations Charter!

[colabottle]

workingmum Wrote:

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

> We live on dog kennel hill and wouldn't get in to

> charter 1 but would stand a good chance of getting

> into charter 2.

> This area has been a blackspot as far as secondary

> school admissions go, lots of current yr 6 kids

> ending up with places in walworth so this is

> fantastic news.

> The whole Harris single sex vs co ed thing is

> irrelevant for us as we wouldn't stand a chance of

> getting into them anyway.

> As far as the habs heat map goes, I haven't seen

> it but I did hear that the charter bid got more

> than double the number of signatures despite the

> campaign starting later.

Hi Workingmum,

Do you think the large number of supporting signatures might have anything to do with Charter campaigning to their current parents?

It seems to me that the bid for a free school was started initially to meet a need in East Dulwich. The site of the school is the only place with adequate space for a secondary school in the area, and, as such relates only to spacial practicalities and is not reflective of their being a need in that area, which is already served by Charter 1. It seems irrational to me that Charter are now talking about the school benefiting black holes in Camberwell, when this leaves children in East Dulwich still lacking the school places that the bid was first initiated to create.

[MsMaz]

Yes I agree Colabottle - apparently Charter was fishing for signatures of support from current Charter families and families already clearly in the Charter 1 catchment. I would definitely be interested in seeing a heat map of their support, which they haven't provided. I was on the supporter list, my address is East Dulwich, SE22, but we would be out of its catchment on distance only. The whole point was a new school for East Dulwich, as you say. If Charter catchments overlap, that would be ridiculous and could also, for example, push Charter 1 catchment more over to Herne Hill/Ruskin park, etc - again not the point of this campaign.

Workingmum - the heat map is on p.1 of this thread, posted by samstopit of the Haberdashers campaign. And also I know of kids from Dog Kennel Hill area whose boys go to Harris Boys East Dulwich, so you would have a chance from there, too.

[albert]

Congratulations Charter. Well deserved.

[Elephant]

It seems that people are forgetting that this is the only land available to build, irrespective of what federation was given the green light, the same issues of catchment would apply. There simply is not enough available land to build in east Dulwich. There does seem to be a black hole in South Camberwell?