School 'selection By Mortgage' Will Stop

[TheCountOfNowhere]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/8540055/Schools-win-right-to-turn-away-middle-class-children.html

[The Masked Tulip]

School 'selection by mortgage' will stop: Poorer pupils to get priority over those living nearby

The move, criticised as an assault on the middle classes, has prompted allegations that the Coalition Government is attempting to socially engineer secondary school admissions.

It will spell an end to well-off parents buying a home in the catchment area of a popular secondary school to secure places for their sons or daughters.

In future, even living right next door to an oversubscribed school may not guarantee a place for a pupil. In London, property prices can be inflated by as much as £400,000 close to the best institutions.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1391343/School-selection-mortgage-stop-Poorer-pupils-priority-living-nearby.html#ixzz1NVaOZNFW

Not sure whether this will affect whole of the UK or just England.

In my part of the world I can think of 2 areas whose houses are marketed at being in certain school catchement areas and command a premium. Both areas have Council estates just outside the catchment areas, within yards literally, so if this law is brought in then the houses currently commanding a premium for being the catchment area will no longer be a certainty to get your kids in the schools.

[The Masked Tulip]

Ah, you beat me to it by seconds - drat

Edited May 27, 2011 by The Masked Tulip

[The Masked Tulip]

Mods, can you merge the threads please?

[General Congreve]

So governments have tried to level the playing field by getting rid of grammar schools. Now they are getting rid of catchment areas that allow parents to 'choose' a good school for their kids.

If they close enough loopholes to school selection the government should be able to ensure all pupils sink to the lowest educational denominator. It will fit well with our socialist state.

There's good reason parents want access to certain schools for their kids, it's because they will fair better educationally in an environment with peers of a similar ability. Now, having money doesn't immediately equate to being brighter, but on average I would say higher wage earners have higher IQ's than lower wage earners. Consequently they are likely to pass on their genes to their kids, who are also likely to have higher IQs. Ergo, on average, parents that can afford to live in good catchment areas tend to have brighter kids and collectively those brighter kids make for successful schools.

Well not any more, you try learning algebra with chavvy Kevin and his mates giving the teacher lip, burping and swearing at each other in the background.

And all this pushed through by c4nts that went to Eton and Harrow. They really do want to destroy the middle classes in every way possible.

Edited May 27, 2011 by General Congreve

[Tiger Woods?]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/8540055/Schools-win-right-to-turn-away-middle-class-children.html

Good grief. Now there is truly no reason to go to work. Not only will you have a lower effective income than someone on benefits, their kids get first pick of the schools. £430 quid extra for every deprived pupil.

Edited May 27, 2011 by Tiger Woods?

[porca misèria]

So governments have tried to level the playing field by getting rid of grammar schools. Now they are getting rid of catchment areas that allow parents to 'choose' a good school for their kids.

Erm, grammar schools involved selection of children. Catchment areas select by parent. Important difference.

Not that that justifies endless political meddling.

If they close enough loopholes to school selection the government should be able to ensure all pupils sink to the lowest educational denominator. It will fit well with our socialist state.

Or boost the fee-paying sector?

There's good reason parents want access to certain schools for their kids, it's because they will fair better educationally in an environment with peers of a similar ability. Now, having money doesn't immediately equate to being brighter, but on average I would say higher wage earners have higher IQ's than lower wage earners. Consequently they are likely to pass on their genes to their kids, who are also likely to have higher IQs. Ergo, on average, parents that can afford to live in good catchment areas tend to have brighter kids and collectively those brighter kids make for successful schools.

Averages like that are iniquitous: they preserve privileges of the Bertie Wooster types, and keep the plebs firmly in their place.

Like high house prices.

Well not any more, you try learning algebra with chavvy Kevin and his mates giving the teacher lip, burping and swearing at each other in the background.

You've led a sheltered life if they weren't, at the very least, throwing a wide range of things from the harmless (like paper) trough to the messy or painful. They certainly woz at the big comprehensive wot I went to.

And all this pushed through by c4nts that went to Eton and Harrow. They really do want to destroy the middle classes in every way possible.

Could this particular move not be about trying to tackle some iniquitious and artificial house price divides created by accidents of school catchments? You want house 1 to fetch a price tag twice that of house 2 across the road because it enjoys the privileged provision of a taxpayer-funded service?

Edited May 27, 2011 by porca misèria

[justthisbloke]

Big win for the fee-paying sector.

The catchment area cost uplift will now be spent on middling independent day schools at £3k a term.

Personally, I'd home educate my sprogs.

[mitchbux]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/8540055/Schools-win-right-to-turn-away-middle-class-children.html

Unless they scrap league tables and OfSTED reports, I can't see it making that much of a difference, especially as they are in the process of changing the amount of points awarded to some of the diploma type quallifications.

'Chavvy Kevin's' diploma in groundskeeping, awarded for his lunchtime punishment litter-picking skills won't be equivalent to an A-level any longer, and he'll drag the average down.

'Chavvy Kevin' will need to prove that he's bright enough or they'll keep on plumping for the sort of parents who provide funds via the PTA, and give free help in school.

In my area, the best schools are so far from the deprived areas of town, that only those disadvantaged children with parents with a 'Middle-class' view of education will bother to apply anyway. The ones applying, but failing to get into the best schools here are in a no-man's-land between the salary required to afford the 'right' house, and the one which attracts the 'pupil premium'.

[Tonkers]

I was forced into a grammar school because of excellent scores on my 11 plus. All my friends went to the 'normal' schools.

Best thing that ever happened to me. A couple of people in my intake came from similar council estates. Life changing for both of them.

[SarahBell]

Neighbour has been told her kid has to go to the school a couple of miles away and walk past the one nearer ... because she lives too far from it

*rolls eyes*

[Greg Bowman]

Big win for the fee-paying sector.

The catchment area cost uplift will now be spent on middling independent day schools at £3k a term.

Personally, I'd home educate my sprogs.

Always felt that was a contradiction in terms

[Bosh]

Tory party cuts it's own throat.

[Tonkers]

I too went to a grammar, however to ever think they will come back in the same shape or form is cloud cuckoo. It just wouldn't work democratically.

What I would actually do is bring back grammars - but for 70% of pupils to make it democratically desirable, whilst having special schools for the remaining 30% for whatever the reasons may be - special learning needs, vocational skills/low skills based training, behaviour problems whatever.

Well that's what we had, many kids were quickly dispatched to the school for special kids, or Borstal, that was quite popular at the time!

Mind you, the comprehensive with simply the worst reputation in our area produced some very successful self made businessmen (boys only school). School of hard knocks indeed.

[Greg Bowman]

Big win for the fee-paying sector.

The catchment area cost uplift will now be spent on middling independent day schools at £3k a term.

Personally, I'd home educate my sprogs.

Surely a win/win. Middle class fee dodgers with sharp elbows will now choose to pay fees leaving more resources for under performing schools( and not pushing up house prices in that area) in the State sector. Coupled with the focus on public benefit provision through bursaries and scholarships that has intensified under the coalition seems to me an improvement on todays situation.

Some 3k schools are far from middling one of the best in Herts was started by a teacher himself in the 80's and now has 400 pupils and excellent results I think Chris Woodhead said without all the country club trappings and state sector left wing dogma you can produce superb rounded students with great life skills and results for something like 8k

Work it out class of 20 x 8k gives £160k a year base revenue Costs:

Building -but not country club and plenty of viable commercial properties around

Teacher - good one 60k with on costs

Overheads in any biz should be no more than 20% (which includes Head's salary)

Some hiring of pitches/sports facilities but not going to add up to more than 10k per class unit per year

Equipment but only infrastructure (whiteboards/ school network say 10k a class room and amortised over three years) kids lease or buy own laptops standard in private education

No wonder peoople are quueing up to create schools

Edited May 27, 2011 by Greg Bowman

[noodle doodle]

The BBC has a bit more detail --> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-13570147

However, children eligible for free school meals - those whose parents earn less than £16,000 a year - could be given priority under the proposed changes, which will go out to consultation.

But this would apply only to "free schools" set up by parents and community groups under the government's flagship programme, and academies, which are state schools operating outside local authority control.

Schools would not be forced to prioritise in this way, and would have to consult the local community first if they wanted to, the Department for Education said.

So basically, hardly any schools at all will end up doing this, especially the good schools where the local community will consist of the richer types who have bought the houses closest to that school!

[Riedquat]

Well that's what we had, many kids were quickly dispatched to the school for special kids, or Borstal, that was quite popular at the time!

Mind you, the comprehensive with simply the worst reputation in our area produced some very successful self made businessmen (boys only school). School of hard knocks indeed.

Just reinforces my opinion that businessmen are only distinguished from crooks by wearing suits.

As far as I can make out schools can select children based on everything apart from academic ability anyway (an utterly stupid idea, considering what schools are supposed to be for), so at some point just perhaps someone will remove that single idiotic restriction.

[Greg Bowman]

Tory party cuts it's own throat.

Not really the Tories were at their strongest when they identified with the aspirational Blue collar man under Thatcher, the majority of tories in urban areas are of that demographic. The late boomers were victims and successes as Tonkers mentioned we went to some pretty dire schools and did alright.

We don't identify with the sharp elbowed middle class what you are seeing is the restoration of the old alliance between the aspirational blue collar self made man/woman/tradesman and the toffs. Horse racing/gambling/drinking/slightly yobbish behaviour/ garish clothes/tight networks the list goes on of smiliarities.

The Tory party is actually doing the reverse of cutting its own throat it is realigning with it's two major sets of supporters.

It was labour who promoted the theory that we are all middle class. A section of society created by the Victorians enhanced by the Taylorism and mangement heirachies of the 20th century and now is over.

After all who wants to be middle at anything - you either want to be the best - the artisan or independently wealthy so you have choices

Edited May 27, 2011 by Greg Bowman

[Timm]

The BBC has a bit more detail --> http://www.bbc.co.uk...cation-13570147

However, children eligible for free school meals - those whose parents earn less than £16,000 a year - could be given priority under the proposed changes, which will go out to consultation.

But this would apply only to "free schools" set up by parents and community groups under the government's flagship programme, and academies, which are state schools operating outside local authority control.

Schools would not be forced to prioritise in this way, and would have to consult the local community first if they wanted to, the Department for Education said.

So basically, hardly any schools at all will end up doing this, especially the good schools where the local community will consist of the richer types who have bought the houses closest to that school!

This seems to be a non story to me.

[Greg Bowman]

Just reinforces my opinion that businessmen are only distinguished from crooks by wearing suits.

As far as I can make out schools can select children based on everything apart from academic ability anyway (an utterly stupid idea, considering what schools are supposed to be for), so at some point just perhaps someone will remove that single idiotic restriction.

A businessman or business woman pays your wages either directly or through taxes on the value they create if you are in the public sector. What a lovely middle class comment.

[Tonkers]

Just reinforces my opinion that businessmen are only distinguished from crooks by wearing suits.

As far as I can make out schools can select children based on everything apart from academic ability anyway (an utterly stupid idea, considering what schools are supposed to be for), so at some point just perhaps someone will remove that single idiotic restriction.

I hope so. It should matter more. My early aptitude was down to my parenting, there was simply no encouragement anywhere else. To have that thrown on the scrap heap due to come social mobility box ticking, where I was that very model of social mobility, is cruel and stupid. It makes me think it's not what the government wants at all.

[PopGun]

The school league table performance system which germinated this whole HPI catchment area debacle, was one of the main instigators of social mobility decline under new labour.

Anything that can help over turn this would be welcomed imo. However since when did anything from politicians actually “do what it says on the tin”?

Edited May 27, 2011 by PopGun

[skomer]

Brighton and Hove have lotteries to stop the those in wealthy catchment areas from hogging access to the best schools to the detriment of those on poorer estates......

So far it has had no effect on house prices locally :angry:

But really Its just a typical Telegraph dog-whistle piece of journalism protecting their readership profile

[swissy_fit]

I too went to a grammar, however to ever think they will come back in the same shape or form is cloud cuckoo. It just wouldn't work democratically.

What I would actually do is bring back grammars - but for 70% of pupils to make it democratically desirable, whilst having special schools for the remaining 30% for whatever the reasons may be - special learning needs, vocational skills/low skills based training, behaviour problems whatever.

Why?

Grammar schools were the engine of social mobility, so Labour and Lib Dems should like the idea.

I can't see why people wouldn't vote for it. Voting against would be effectively saying "my kids are too thick to benefit from this" - most people think their kids are bright, even when they're not.

So many of the changes made by Labour to supposedly favour the poorer part of society have ended up having the opposite effect that you would almost think they were doing it deliberately.

[arrgee1991]

This seems to be a non story to me.

+1

The controversial change will be made as part of a major overhaul of the school admissions code, the rules that dictate how state schools in England allocate places.

Reading between the lines, this will encourage many schools to become free schools so that they can ensure they get the intake they see as best for the school. Faith schools have their own criteria anyway and won't be affected by this, and the catchment areas for grammar schools are far and wide.

I believe that de facto grammar schools will be the result of the free school initiative. They can claim to be all-ability but without the clear criteria currently in place (ie within catchment and closest) they can cherry pick to some degree and skew the intake to attract the brighter children and obtain a high placing in the league tables.

The only losers under this would be home owners whose 'premium' is built into the house price. No bad thing.

Edited May 27, 2011 by arrgee1991