Consultation for the Charter School East Dulwich

[redjam]

But I'm not sure what stats could possibly help us here. The Nunhead contingent might be able to prove they have the greatest need in terms of lack of school choices close by. The East Dulwich contingent would say, well, the free school idea was set up mainly by East Dulwich parents so therefore everyone with an SE22 postcode should be guaranteed a place. The South Camberwell contingent would say, hang on, that's not fair, we live right by the site and you're telling us we can't send our kids there? And so it would go on, with everyone claiming they have some kind of right that others don't have.

It's not shutting down debate to say that this would open up a massive can of worms. It WOULD open up a massive can of worms. Which is why a straightforward site-distance-based admissions system is the fairest one. And as rightlight and others have said, we can expect the catchment of the new school to be bigger than some of the scaremongering figures that have quoted on here, so most of us within a reasonable distance should get in anyway. And for those that don't, it should ease the pressure on other local schools.

[rightlight]

And if there isn't a "need" in the area near the school, then it would mean that the places would not be taken up by the very local children, and the area of the catchment would expand - in all directions.

[nyph]

Wow.

[nicetomeetyou]

It's such a myth that ED parents were the only ones campaigning for the school, and that belief creates the sense of entitlement to places at the new school. At the consultations, Simon shows a heatmap of supporters which demonstrates deep support throughout SE5 and SE15 communities, and that despite the fact that the closest communities are estates, which, thanks to language differences and other outreach issues (they didn't put tables in the estates when they were drumming up support) didn't respond in large numbers. And still, CSED came up with the right solution, which we should all support.

I didn't say this is Camberwell's saviour school - but considering one side of the school site actually borders South Camberwell ward (see http://maps.southwark.gov.uk/connect/southwark.jsp?mapcfg=defaultmap&mylayer0=S_Boundaries_WardAndCouncillorsNew&x=533699&y=175390&z=7), I'd say the claim isn't far fetched.

Fortunately for everyone on this list, I honestly believe a school size that's 50% larger (six forms, not four, as rightlight and others point out) than the CSRPH, with a catchment that could extend 2km away from the school and ease the pressure on the other schools to extend their catchments too, as redjam says will provide a great resource for all parents who want access. Then let's build some more schools.

[Belle]

Worth reiterating: the site of a free school is almost incidental. It's a case of finding somewhere in the borough that is fit for purpose. In fact it needn't even be in the borough! It doesn't necessarily reflect the location of the demand which brought about the free school application and its success. Which is why people (parents) talked about nodal points from the very start.

Free schools are supposed to be demand-led. That's why the figures are important. As I've said before, I highly doubt I'd be in the catchment even with an Eastern nodal point, so I no longer have a real interest in this, but feel it's important to clarify some of these points.

[confusedbyitall]

and that belief creates the sense of entitlement to places at the new school. At the consultations, Simon shows a heatmap of supporters

This is such a load of old tosh

A sense of entitlement!!!! A heatmap of supporters does not show demand or need so get of your high horse and start with facts not inflammatory choice of words which make no sense....

To add any nodal point off the school site creates a qualitative selection

IMO, the DfE clearly was rejecting an artificial move of the catchment into affluent areas already better served by quality schools

Again what is this based on? the dofe did not reject habs bid they passed muster - went down to a lord whoever who has no idea about the area who went eenie meenie miny mo and chose charter

Even now there is no data from charter regarding the distance from this years admissions...surely not difficult to find

Again not based on anything than charters past history of excluding those they did not want in their school

[MsMaz]

If Charter 1 changed its policy to 'crow flies' rather than safe-walking, then Charter 1 would already include a lot more intake from the estates around South Camberwell and Dog Kennel Hill...

[championofthehill]

Perhaps that is why Charter 1 does not want to change its policy.

[LondonMix]

Wow, the discussion has gotten a bit heated over the weekend!

1. No one knows what the catchment for the New Charter is going to be. It will depend on how well the school does, changing economic demographics concerning private schooling, and geographic dispersion of pupils. This is true of secondary school demand in general.

2. With that said, the new school is designed to meet the surge in primary school pupils entering secondary school in the South of Southwark helping to offset a decrease in average local catchments. Also, this is a much bigger school than the existing Charter.

3. Secondary school is very different from primary school?children in secondary school can be expected to travel within the borough. I say this because?.

4. Currently, there is no borough wide shortage of secondary school places in Southwark!?every child can attend school within the borough with a significant surplus of spaces left over. 2016 was the first year this was going to change but with the approval of the new Charter school there will be a couple hundred surplus places in Southwark until 2018.

5. Therefore, the problem is that some secondary schools in the borough are less popular than others. Only a few schools are responsible for 80% of the historic undersubscription generated by the surplus spaces.

6. Making sure that all our secondary schools are very good is key. That way no family will feel short changed. A nodal point doesn?t address this underlying issue which is at the heart of this debate even though no one is saying so explicitly.

7. So you know, the provision of the remaining circa 300 places needed in the from 2018 in Southwark is currently anticipated to be created via the expansion of the following existing schools: St Michaels Catholic College, City of London Academy, Bacon?s College and Kingsdale School following an architectural and cost analysis carried out in 2012 of all Southwark schools. These plans will be monitored against actual shortfalls?secondary state school demand is hard to predict and easy to overestimate?to ensure too many places are not created which would undermine the financial viability of existing undersubscribed schools.

8. If as some parents are articulating, a local high-quality co-ed secondary school is in high demand and desired by multiple communities who all participated in the campaign, then the only fair way to allocate places would be via a lottery within all of those areas. However, parents hate lotteries and I doubt anyone will actually push for this.

Just to add, 85% of parents get one of their top 3 choices in Southwark and 93% get one of their top 6 (as of 2013/14). I personally suspect that once the current 200 place surplus is eliminated and more parents are allocated the few currently undersubscribed schools, those schools will naturally improve, eliminating a big part of the problem.

All the information I?ve quoted can be found in March 18th, 2014 CD14 School Places Strategy Update, Cabinet Report. Just google it.

[landsberger]

This is almost certainly the case

championofthehill Wrote:

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

> Perhaps that is why Charter 1 does not want to

> change its policy.

[DuncanW]

I am against the nodal point proposal and agree strongly with NiceToMeetYou and London Mix?s posts. For the record, like LondonMix I live in a location whereby I think my children would gain admission either way so am not speaking from vested interest.

I really do understand the concern and frustration that parents like Cola Bottle experience and it?s a big worry to think that your kids may not get into a school of one?s choice or one that is near to your home. But places at CSED will be finite, so surely if the nodal point system gives a child at that end of Friern Road a place, would that not be at the expense of a child who lives nearer to the school, but in the wrong direction? How would that be fair to that child?

To be fair, I don?t believe the pro nodal point argument is driven by class. People just want the best for their own kids and there?s nothing wrong with that. But there is a strong link to class and to argue otherwise by suggesting ED and Camberwell & Peckham have a similar mix of demographics seems way off the mark to me. The problem is that middle-class parents are typically more engaged and active in campaigns such as this and make their arguments more skilfully. That?s fair enough, but should not mean their children get priority access to popular schools over children whose parents are not as articulate and engaged, don?t have a background in statistical analysis or policy research, don?t speak English that well, or who didn?t sign up for the campaign ? which I hadn?t realised conferred some sort of privileged stakeholder status/entitlement to a place, did I get that wrong?

[LondonMix]

I think everyone wants the best for their kids and that?s normal and healthy.

I do think the most popular schools are in part popular due to their socio economic make up but I don?t think that makes anyone who wants to go there a bad person. People want to send their children to a school that substantially (though of course not exclusively) reflects their own background and identity. If there was an American school in Dulwich, I would without hesitation opt for it, but that doesn?t make me a xenophobe (I hope).

I think once some of the currently under-subscribed secondaries nearby have a more balanced socio-economic mix, they will become more popular. Parents always tend to be uncomfortable with schools that present extremes one way or the other (particularly if the extreme is different from themselves somehow).

[MsMaz]

It seems to me that, since the start of the campaigns for a new school, there have developed 2 camps - one for going more to south Camberwell, one for going more towards East Dulwich and south of there. Let's be clear, there is no 'right' or 'wrong' solution. As said before, many of those estates around DKH would get into the first Charter if they only agreed to change the policy to crow-flies, too.

No one is claiming privilege or entitled-ness, we have just all been asked to support 2 campaigns for a new school over the past 2 years - and most of us gave our support as we were told in was in our best interest to support both - and many of us want a chance for our children to go the new school. But to be fair, if the support for this school runs from Denmark Hill station to Forest Hill Road and Nunhead, then why not just reach some sort of geographical compromise - to be fair to all?

Eg. if the original Habs was looking at a nodal point a little way up Northcross Road, and the other half want Jarvis Road, and there are an equal amount asking for both in the consultation, why not find an equal point between the two? If the school covers 1.5km max (no way 2km) then that should cover much more of south East Dulwich/Nunhead, as well as all of Bellenden, DKH, Champion Hill, Camberwell Grove, Grove Lane (no affluence round there, of course!). Us on the outskirts will probably still miss out but at least a compromise for everyone might be the fair way forward.

I think a nodal point off site doesn't matter, as we know site wasn't exactly located for the need, and it's alreayd in Charter catchment, as has been stated countless times.

[Belle]

Well said MsMaz.

[LondonMix]

That's not true though is it?

The Charter bid which was always based on distance from the site (which was identified on Dulwich Hospital) had significantly more support than the Habs bid.

Anyway, if the school's catchment is 1.5km it will cover the areas you mention without a nodal point but include more of ED and Nunhead and less of Peckham and Camberwell. The nodal point only changes the demographics in a significant way if the catchment is small.

There is no actual reason for a nodal point except parents in East Dulwich and Nunhead want one which isn't justification for excluding children closer to the actual school from attending for the benefit of those further from it.

[hpsaucey]

LondonMix Wrote:

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

> That's not true though is it?

>

> The Charter bid which was always based on distance

> from the site (which was identified on Dulwich

> Hospital) had significantly more support than the

> Habs bid.

>

> Anyway, if the school's catchment is 1.5km it will

> cover the areas you mention without a nodal point

> but include more of ED and Nunhead and less of

> Peckham and Camberwell. The nodal point only

> changes the demographics in a significant way if

> the catchment is small.

>

> There is no actual reason for a nodal point except

> parents in East Dulwich and Nunhead want one which

> isn't justification for excluding children closer

> to the actual school from attending for the

> benefit of those further from it.

Although it could be said that the Charter bid had an 'advantage' numbers wise, being able to drum up supporters from existing local parents of Charter school kids. Is that 'fair'? Evidently some will argue 'yes' given that a free school is granted on the amount of support it shows. However you could say that the support for a free school at all here - came from those supporting either/and/or the Haberdasher's Bid or Charter bid.

And part of the campaign bid if I remember rightly said it would consult on actual admissions policy afterwards(?) We're back to saying this is a school for local children - with the debate being about what 'local' should mean and about notions of 'fairness'. There evidently won't be a solution that makes everyone happy but...

HP

[LondonMix]

Secondary schools are not for specific micro communities. If you read what Southwark published, the new school is designed to meet a shortage of spaces in the South of the borough ahead of the general shortage of spaces borough wide.

The idea that some parents are basically only prepared to support the creation of a new community asset if they can ensure they get into it above and beyond other people in the community is a bit? crass.

However you try to justify it, it is not fair. The fact that some local parents are more engaged and more vocal doesn?t mean they have the right to secure greater access to a public facility than would otherwise be the case.

To be blunt, the fact that some people want to secure and advantage for themselves isn?t a justification for granting that demand. Public policy needs to be beyond certain people asserting what they want for themselves. That can't be the organising principle of a fair society.

[littlek1cker]

Our final public consultation event is tonight at Heber School 7-9pm. You also have until 26th June to let us know your views via our online survey or by writing to us. We are keen to hear from as many people as possible.

[colabottle]

Hi Simon,

Have you been able to get the figure on distance yet? Thanks.

[littlek1cker]

colabottle Wrote:

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

> Hi Simon,

>

> Have you been able to get the figure on distance

> yet? Thanks.

I have now heard back from the admissions team at The Charter School: Here are the figures for this year and last year for first offers based on distance, ie not including offers made based on other criteria, such as Looked After Children and siblings. Bear in mind that these distances are based on safe walking distance, which is the current policy of The Charter School, unlike the proposal for the new school which is to measure distance in a straight line (as the crow flies). This means it is difficult to plot the effective catchment area for the current school based on these figures, but it will certainly be much smaller than if these distances were 'as the crow flies' measurements.

2015: 1121m

2014: 1554m

I've been asked to provide the following explanation: The distance moves annually according to: how many 11 year olds were born in that cohort; of those, where do they live; of those, who applies to TCS. These figures cannot be predicted year on year; families make their decisions based on a range of criteria according to which schools they list as preferences on the Common Application Form.

[landsberger]

> I've been asked to provide the following

> explanation: The distance moves annually according

> to: how many 11 year olds were born in that

> cohort; of those, where do they live; of those,

> who applies to TCS. These figures cannot be

> predicted year on year; families make their

> decisions based on a range of criteria according

> to which schools they list as preferences on the

> Common Application Form.

So, to make an educated guess, you would need to know how many 11 year olds were born in the wards that "feed" Charter. And an estimation of siblings, which varies wildly.

[colabottle]

Thank you Simon, for providing the information on distance. Much appreciated.

[intexasatthe moment]

posted on wrong thread

[largeginandtonic]

landsberger Wrote:

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

> > I've been asked to provide the following

> > explanation: The distance moves annually

> according

> > to: how many 11 year olds were born in that

> > cohort; of those, where do they live; of those,

> > who applies to TCS. These figures cannot be

> > predicted year on year; families make their

> > decisions based on a range of criteria

> according

> > to which schools they list as preferences on

> the

> > Common Application Form.

>

> So, to make an educated guess, you would need to

> know how many 11 year olds were born in the wards

> that "feed" Charter. And an estimation of

> siblings, which varies wildly.

And whether the surrounding schools have changed their admissions policies (e.g. Harris Girls and the Lewisham schools)and what effect this will have; and how parental preferences between schools are changing. For siblings I think you wouldn't go far wrong assuming that 1/3 of places in a school would be filled with siblings (except for brand new schools like Charter East Dulwich of course. But it is still very very difficult to make any kind of prediction.

[HannahSE23]

Could someone attending the meeting tonight please update the rest of us on the outcome? Thanks!