by Nosybusy » Wed Dec 03, 2014 4:08 pm
I think the council's proposition is better than the current situation however 800m is an arbitrary number which may have an effect for some schools but not for others with tiny catchments.
I wonder what people think about the following rule:
1. if you stayed in the same address your first child got in from or moved closer to the school then siblings automatically get in.
2. if however you moved further away then siblings would have to get in on distance like everybody else.
This stops people from playing the system by moving close to the school for a short period of time and then moving away. But it also avoids people “dropping out of the catchment” after their first child got in if the catchment becomes smaller and they have not moved home. And if they want to move or are “forced to move” they still a relatively large area they can move to and still retain their sibling priority.
It also adapts the rule to the school’s situation rather than choosing a relatively random number like 800m. Schools with larger catchments will have larger areas to move to, schools with smaller catchments smaller ones.
On the other hand the 800m proposed will not stop people moving in close to Belleville (if the school adopts the rule) and to move 700m away straight after their child gets in. The 800m radius includes pretty much the whole of between the commons, a huge area compared to the catchment.
I proposed this in the current consultation, guess the council did not like it (is it a problem of record keeping? maybe they can explain why). I wonder what people think about it as it seems to answer all the commonly voiced objections I have seen and would definitely make the catchments bigger.
I think the council's proposition is better than the current situation however 800m is an arbitrary number which may have an effect for some schools but not for others with tiny catchments.
I wonder what people think about the following rule:
1. if you stayed in the same address your first child got in from or moved closer to the school then siblings automatically get in.
2. if however you moved further away then siblings would have to get in on distance like everybody else.
This stops people from playing the system by moving close to the school for a short period of time and then moving away. But it also avoids people “dropping out of the catchment” after their first child got in if the catchment becomes smaller and they have not moved home. And if they want to move or are “forced to move” they still a relatively large area they can move to and still retain their sibling priority.
It also adapts the rule to the school’s situation rather than choosing a relatively random number like 800m. Schools with larger catchments will have larger areas to move to, schools with smaller catchments smaller ones.
On the other hand the 800m proposed will not stop people moving in close to Belleville (if the school adopts the rule) and to move 700m away straight after their child gets in. The 800m radius includes pretty much the whole of between the commons, a huge area compared to the catchment.
I proposed this in the current consultation, guess the council did not like it (is it a problem of record keeping? maybe they can explain why). I wonder what people think about it as it seems to answer all the commonly voiced objections I have seen and would definitely make the catchments bigger.