Charter vs Private school

[zanna]

Hi

Is (the old) Charter still good? I am thinking of applying for my child? Does anyone have children there and can recommend?

Many thanks

[Sol]

All the people I know with Children there are happy and results are good but you need to go and see it by yourself to see if it is the right fit for you and your child; different people have different expectations.

[Scruffy Mummy]

The catchment to old Charter is still pretty small - although with the new ED Charter last year taking 120 children seemed to widen the 'catchment' for Old Charter. I knew someone living near Melbourne Grove who got a place at the old Charter on a waiting list place. However if you live the other side of Lordship Lane, you really haven't got much of a chance and certainly not in the first round.

[Sol]

Furthest place offered this year was 1.3 kilometres safe walking distance; next year it will be straight line (as the crow flies)

[tomskip]

Scruffy Mummy Wrote:

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

> The catchment to old Charter is still pretty small

> - although with the new ED Charter last year

> taking 120 children seemed to widen the

> 'catchment' for Old Charter. I knew someone

> living near Melbourne Grove who got a place at the

> old Charter on a waiting list place. However if

> you live the other side of Lordship Lane, you

> really haven't got much of a chance and certainly

> not in the first round.

Unless you rent temporarily in the 'catchment', whilst keeping hold of the house you own outside of said catchment, get your first child into the school and then move back to your owned house after a year or two. And, yes, unbelievably the school does still allow this to happen.

[BeccaL]

I thought the Charter was stopping automatic admission for siblings, because of people doing exactly what Tomskip says. however, don't know that for a fact....

[Sol]

After visiting many local secondary schools during the open days I agree with people that say there are many other good secondary states schools in Dulwich and surrounding areas not just Charter

[Medusa]

...and different schools suit different children. I've got Y11s at two different secondaries and they are both very good.

[flocker spotter]

DuncanW Wrote:

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

> Re: the sibling rule, this is just a thought that

> comes to mind, but what about invalidating it if a

> family move address? Stay put and you get your

> sibling place even if the catchment changes, but

> if you move all bets are off.

Nice idea to prevent people playing the system but totally unfair for families living in rented accommodation who have little security of tenure. Second children also often want to join an older sibling at secondary school because they already feel an affinity with that place by proxi. These children should not be disadvantaged because their parents want an extra bedroom/(larger) garden etc... People may not like a lottery system (such as at Kingsdale), but it is the only fair system.

[HannahSE23]

BeccaL Wrote:

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

> I thought the Charter was stopping automatic

> admission for siblings, because of people doing

> exactly what Tomskip says. however, don't know

> that for a fact....

According to the latest admissions policy, siblings still get priority...

[LondonMix]

Lotteries are the only fair system

[redjam]

tomskip Wrote:

>

> Unless you rent temporarily in the 'catchment',

> whilst keeping hold of the house you own outside

> of said catchment, get your first child into the

> school and then move back to your owned house

> after a year or two. And, yes, unbelievably the

> school does still allow this to happen.

This is a problem that affects many oversubscribed schools around the country, not just Charter. But I don't see how it is the school's fault? The admissions process is handled by the council; it's hardly the school's job to go round policing every application they get each year (which number in the thousands). It's really only the council who can spot if there are any discrepancies (e.g. in address of council tax bill or whatever) and even then it's tricky for them to prove. The only way for this sort of practice to be stamped out is by trying to improve ALL state schools so that you don't get these hype-bubbles developing around particular establishments that are deemed to be more desirable than all others nearby. In this area I think it's already happening - I don't think Charter is now seen as head and shoulders above the other schools round here. At least that certainly wasn't my impression when I looked round last year - I was pleasantly surprised by how many good schools there are within easy reach of ED.

I can see that lotteries are the fairest system, but they're also horrible for parents - and kids, who get separated from their primary-school friends. And not great for the transport system/environment to have loads of secondary school kids commuting around the place instead of going to their nearest school (I gather this was ironically a problem in Green-run Brighton when they introduced a borough-wide lottery system).

[LondonMix]

The admission process is handled by the school, not by the council as its an Academy.

redjam Wrote:

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

> tomskip Wrote:

>

> >

> > Unless you rent temporarily in the 'catchment',

> > whilst keeping hold of the house you own

> outside

> > of said catchment, get your first child into

> the

> > school and then move back to your owned house

> > after a year or two. And, yes, unbelievably the

> > school does still allow this to happen.

>

> This is a problem that affects many oversubscribed

> schools around the country, not just Charter. But

> I don't see how it is the school's fault? The

> admissions process is handled by the council; it's

> hardly the school's job to go round policing every

> application they get each year (which number in

> the thousands). It's really only the council who

> can spot if there are any discrepancies (e.g. in

> address of council tax bill or whatever) and even

> then it's tricky for them to prove. The only way

> for this sort of practice to be stamped out is by

> trying to improve ALL state schools so that you

> don't get these hype-bubbles developing around

> particular establishments that are deemed to be

> more desirable than all others nearby. In this

> area I think it's already happening - I don't

> think Charter is now seen as head and shoulders

> above the other schools round here. At least that

> certainly wasn't my impression when I looked round

> last year - I was pleasantly surprised by how many

> good schools there are within easy reach of ED.

>

> I can see that lotteries are the fairest system,

> but they're also horrible for parents - and kids,

> who get separated from their primary-school

> friends. And not great for the transport

> system/environment to have loads of secondary

> school kids commuting around the place instead of

> going to their nearest school (I gather this was

> ironically a problem in Green-run Brighton when

> they introduced a borough-wide lottery system).

[tomskip]

Many over subscribed schools do a better job than the Charter school at keeping on top of dubious applications such as the one described in my post. The critical issue is owning another house nearby (but not quite near enough) and keeping hold of that to move back to after the temporary renting in catchment period. Many schools have this specific practice named as being unacceptable in their admissions literature.

The lottery system at Kingsdale could be seen as unfair in this area because it exists in its own bubble. And the lottery element does not apply to siblings there either, for hard to understand reasons. Many secondary school age children in the area cannot go to the same school as their sibling (we have 5 single sex state schools in our immediate locality) so to hold the idea of sibling priority up as somehow necessary or a priority seems inconsistent at best.

[redjam]

OK, I stand corrected if Charter manage their own admissions - I thought because you apply via the council they are the ones who adjudicate it. But I do have sympathy with the schools over this as I don't see how they can realistically police this practice themselves - they get literally thousands of applicants every year; how can they possibly check out who is secretly keeping a second property if people really want to game the system? Especially when so many kids have quite confusing home circumstances anyway with divorced parents etc. I'm not saying it's OK - of course it's not - and I have no knowledge whether Charter are better or worse at managing the problem than other schools, but I think it's a bit harsh to blame them for not keeping on top of it. What do other schools do that they don't? (Genuine question.)

[tomskip]

Redjam, in reply to your question, I've copied and pasted this comment below from an admissions expert on another (parenting) forum:

"Academies and VA schools are in charge of their own admissions policy. The LA still runs the co-ordinated admissions scheme. Many (probably most) LAs that have a problem with renting run checks before passing applications on to schools. If they discover that parents are living in rented accommodation whilst owning a house in the area (information they can get from checking Council Tax records) many will just give the school the address of the house the parents own and ignore the rented address. They should also have a blacklist of addresses they know are let out for admissions purposes. Any application using one of those addresses will be investigated.

If the LA discovers that an application is fraudulent during the admissions process they will use the correct address for the family. The parents are not generally informed of this so there are certainly parents out there who believe they got a place through renting but actually wasted their money.

It isn't over once the child has a place. The offer can still be removed if the application is found to be fraudulent or deliberately misleading, even after the child has started at school. Many LAs will only remove the place during the first term but some have removed places even later. This happens far more than people think it does. I know of cases where parents would have got their child into a decent school if they had been honest, rented to get a place at an outstanding school and succeeded initially but were then found out. Their child's place at the outstanding school was removed and, because the decent school was full, they ended up with a place at the local sink school. Far from helping their child, their actions left their child in a worse situation than if they had been honest.

As has been mentioned above, some schools and LAs only give sibling priority to those still living near the school in an effort to stop people getting their first child in then moving away. This is becoming more widespread. However, for academies this is up to the school, not the LA.

People do rent to get places. Some of them succeed. I doubt that it will ever be possible to weed out all such applications. But most LAs that have a significant problem (and many that don't) are doing everything they can to clamp down on this."

[HannahSE23]

I don't think Southwark/Charter run detailed checks before making an offer. I've heard of too many people who have happily secured a place at the school by renting nearby while keeping hold of their 'main' home. It's fairly standard practice!

[zanna]

Thank you all for the post. Going to see the school soon.

[redjam]

Tomskip, thank you - that's interesting. But it does sound from that that it's the local authority's job to vet the honesty of the applications, not the school's? Which makes more sense, seeing as they're the ones that have access to council tax records. So my point still stands that if Charter has a particular problem with this, it's not necessarily their fault - more a reflection of the fact that it's a popular school with a very narrow catchment so has a higher incidence of applicants attempting to do this. Though I suppose you could argue that it's their distance-only/non-lottery admission that causes the problem in the first place. But then parents hate lotteries so they're damned if they do and damned if they don't.

I should be clear I don't have any affiliation with Charter - just interested in how there could be a way to make it all fairer. Actually reading this thread I'm mainly just happy that my older daughter is now happily settled in her (non-Charter) secondary school this year and all that stress is behind me!

Zanna, to bring it back on topic: good luck. Honestly, all the Year 7 parents I know seem happy with their choice, wherever their kids have landed up. Lots of decent schools round here.

[LondonMix]

I agree redjam that it wouldn't be the Charter's fault. Anyhow, and LA would have to explicitly make this practice illegal to be able to remove an offer and not all LA's have an explicit policy on this. This was a point of contention in Camden a few years back.

Anyhow, I'm really not sure how common this practice is, especially around here. I personally only ever here about it on this forum. I've never known anyone in real life to have done it or anyone who even knows of someone who has done that at their school.

I'm not really sure being able to afford to buy a house in the catchment of good schools (as I have done) is inherently fairer than renting. In both cases, you are using your wealth to access better educational resources-- quite similar to going private.

[cactus]

In my experience, as soon as the LA has issued the formal offer of a school place, then parents have to supply the school with the relevant documentation, usually including the child benefit letter (most often in the mother's name) plus other proof of address, e.g. utility bill etc. So if parents can produce these, then what else can the school do to question their eligibility of a place based on distance?

[Passiflora]

Zanna brought this thread/topic up after a year and a half (asking about the 'old' Charter School) even though they seem to have gone with Elmwood School (sorry not heard of it).

Good luck Zanna and only you can make a choice but I would recommend going along to visit The Charter School.

[zanna]

Thanks for your message. Ive been to see the school and I love it. Elmgreen is good too.