Labour party could make harder to get into an ET school for some people

Tim Robbins

The Labour party wish to get rid of first come first served for school places.
See here: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/school-admissions-bill-battle-looms-over-rules-on-past-pupils-1.2166728


Why does this matter?

Because if you know you don't want to get your child baptised, you will run to the Educate Together school as soon as your child is born and put your child's name down. You are then given a number which operates on first come first served.

So you have an indication if you have a place or not 5 years in advance.

As a parent of non baptised parents, I can tell you there are plenty of people who do baptise their kids and then hum and haw over whether to go to an Educate Together school or a Catholic one and then might decide at the last minute the Educate Together school for their own reasons. If they don't get a place they don't care as much and just go to the Catholic one.

Now, because of the queuing system being removed people who are almost indifferent to getting a place for their kid and apply late will get the same priority as people who know 100% they don't want their kids near a catholic school and are prepared to commit 5 years in advance to that.

The losers here are non-religious. You currently have 92% of schools rejecting you and a good chance in the other 8% if you get in early. Now you will still have 92% of schools rejecting you and you won't know what your chances with the other 8%.

Ridiculous.

Qualitymark

What's an ET school?

shruikan2553

Thats makes no sense, at first we have

It is aimed at making school enrolment more structured, fair and transparent. All school admissions policies will be obliged to include a statement that they shall not discriminate on the basis of any of nine grounds: gender, civil status, family status, sexual orientation, religion, disability, race, Traveller community grounds or special educational needs.

Which is good, then we have

Yes. The existing provisions in equality legislation are provided for. Religious schools can give preference to children of a particular faith in preference to others.

Which means they are discriminating based on religion despite saying

they shall not discriminate on the basis of any of nine grounds: gender, civil status, family status, sexual orientation, religion, disability, race, Traveller community grounds or special educational needs.

It's one or the other.

Penn

Qualitymark wrote: »

What's an ET school?

If you misbehave, the principal phones home.

Qualitymark

Ahhh, after ages racking my brains, I have it - Educate Together. Why must people use these acronyms and assume everyone else will understand?

robindch

Qualitymark wrote: »

[...] Why must people use these acronyms and assume everyone else will understand?

ET is a fairly standard abbreviation around these here parts

Hotblack Desiato

Qualitymark wrote: »

Ahhh, after ages racking my brains, I have it - Educate Together. Why must people use these acronyms and assume everyone else will understand?

If you ever go look on Mumsnet your head will explode.

shruikan2553

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

If you ever go look on Mumsnet your head will explode.

That would be the case with or without abbreviations

lazygal

shruikan2553 wrote: »

That would be the case with or without abbreviations

I was just saying to dh that where dd and ds will go to school is a worry.

Qualitymark

What the f?

Brian Shanahan

Bad Horse wrote: »

If you misbehave, the principal phones home.

Bah-dum-tish!

pauldla

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

Bah-dum-tish!

You mean BDT, surely.

Dravokivich

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Because if you know you don't want to get your child baptised, you will run to the Educate Together school as soon as your child is born and put your child's name down. You are then given a number which operates on first come first served.

So you have an indication if you have a place or not 5 years in advance.

Why!? Just why are you registering a child to a school before you've even got the hang of changing their nappies?

It is insane. Kids should only be registered during the year leading up to when they are going in. The more people who do this the more "normal" that ridiculous carry on becomes.

lazygal

Dravokivich wrote: »

Why!? Just why are you registering a child to a school before you've even got the hang of changing their nappies?

It is insane. Kids should only be registered during the year leading up to when they are going in. The more people who do this the more "normal" that ridiculous carry on becomes.

Because some schools are first come first served so if you leave it till.the year before you won't get a place.

Carawaystick

lazygal wrote: »

Because some schools are first come first served so if you leave it till.the year before you won't get a place.

Really?
Care to post a link to an admissions policy

lazygal

http://www.portobelloetns.org/enrolment.php


I know of parents who had their children's names down for.schools such as this as soon as they had a PPS number. All schools set their own enrolment policies.

Qualitymark

lazygal wrote: »

http://www.portobelloetns.org/enrolment.php


I know of parents who had their children's names down for.schools such as this as soon as they had a PPS number. All schools set their own enrolment policies.

Perhaps it's time for the State, which funds the schools and examines their results, to set the enrolment policies?

I met a friend recently whose utterly non-religiously-affiliated son had got his baby baptised into his grandfather's religion, because a child baptised into *any* faith has a chance of getting into a school, whereas (she told me) a completely non-aligned child has no chance. This is bats.

lazygal

Qualitymark wrote: »

Perhaps it's time for the State, which funds the schools and examines their results, to set the enrolment policies?

I met a friend recently whose utterly non-religiously-affiliated son had got his baby baptised into his grandfather's religion, because a child baptised into *any* faith has a chance of getting into a school, whereas (she told me) a completely non-aligned child has no chance. This is bats.

The school patronage system won't change any time soon. Personally we'd rather home school than baptise. The school system here is one reason we'd consider moving abroad.

expectationlost

I can see why this is being criticised, but, the point is that it will help more mobile people, be they immigrants or people who need to move for work, or move to get a house they can afford, people who can decide 5 years in advance where they're child is going to go to school are in a very privileged place, schools filling up ~5 yrs in advance is a very restrictive policy that boxes out so many people.

magicbastarder

yep, there are probably plenty of people in a position where they'd like to move, but can't because their kid will be dumped back to the bottom of a list. yes, the move would have negative impacts in some areas, but it's a generally positive move, and the benefit will be hopefully cemented when the baptismal preference gets busted.

Hotblack Desiato

There's nothing positive in this for non-religious parents when the vast majority of non-ET schools are still allowed to discriminate against their kids - and there is zero political appetite to change that.
Hopping onto an ET waiting list soon after birth is these parents' only hope in many cases.

(No hope for us - No ET!)

Dravokivich

lazygal wrote: »

Because some schools are first come first served so if you leave it till.the year before you won't get a place.

And I'm saying that's wrong.

In a more mobile society, where a lot of homes are rented, it's kinda of hard to know you'll still be in the area 5 years later. Then you're bumped back in a list because there's a whole lot of other kids registered that they need to confirm are still in the area as the place is being held for them.

My girlfriend registered our kid to a local school when he was 2 months old and he's in a waiting list! I don't like the idea that leads to it at all. It's a mad frenzy.

Hotblack Desiato

It's distasteful yes, but ETs can't discriminate on the basis of religion or non-religion, so how are parents who really want an ET education going to get priority over those who aren't really bothered?

The problem is that religious patronage schools are still allowed to discriminate on the basis of religion, and that there are far too few alternatives to religious patronage schools. That's why there are waiting lists.

There aren't really a lot of great options with admission policies. We could go down the catchment area route as in the UK, but that perpetuates and accentuates perceived social disadvantage and parents game the system to get into 'better' schools. The only real way out of this mess is to ensure that all schools are equally welcoming to children of all religions or none (preferably, non-denominational, but strong opt-out rights at a minimum), mixed gender, have equally high standards, cater equally well for children of special needs and from non-English speaking homes, and aren't dependent on parents for additional income or fund-raising. It's a pipe dream though.

Qualitymark

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

We could go down the catchment area route as in the UK, but that perpetuates and accentuates perceived social disadvantage and parents game the system to get into 'better' schools.

Other countries have the catchment area approach, and make it work. One solution is to give extra funding for teachers and support and homework clubs to schools where the kids start with an educational disadvantage.
(A friend of mine teaches chess in US schools - the kids' general educational results improve when they learn and play chess, as they do when kids learn and play violin. She charges rich schools a high fee and poor schools a low fee; the Robin Hood method, you might say, except she's not robbin', she's givin'.)

silverharp

What % of Catholic schools do not ask for baptismal certs? Just asking as our local girls national school doesn't ?

seamus

Actually I'm in favour of abolishing waiting lists for exactly the reasons outlined in the OP - people who happen to be able to put their child down for the school they want, five years in advance, can do so.

Those who move into the area or otherwise don't have the foresight to rush down to the local school five minutes after the child is born, lose out. It's auctioning off school places to those in the best circumstances and it's ridiculous. Even more ridiculous when you consider that some secondary schools operate waiting lists, 12 years before a child will start with them.

Of course, the religious exemption is still a complete joke. I could live next door to the school and my child will get bumped down the list below a child who lives 2km away because some weird celibate man once poured water on that child's head and made some voodoo incantations.

Places should be offered on the basis of proximity and little else. Every year you redraw every schools' catchment area based on the volumes and locations of people who have applied for access to public schooling and children are assigned a place to the school closest to them which has sufficient capacity. None of this parish or townland bull****. If you live on the edge of D6W but you're 300m from a D24 school, then you're probably going there.
At best dispensation should be made for children whose siblings are currently attending a school, because parents having to split the school run across two schools is crazy.

Hotblack Desiato

seamus wrote: »

Places should be offered on the basis of proximity and little else. Every year you redraw every schools' catchment area based on the volumes and locations of people who have applied for access to public schooling and children are assigned a place to the school closest to them which has sufficient capacity.

What happens in the UK is that the granny's address gets put onto the application if it's closer to a 'better' school.

Fake baptisms going on to get into 'faith schools' too

seamus

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

What happens in the UK is that the granny's address gets put onto the application if it's closer to a 'better' school.

Fake baptisms going on to get into 'faith schools' too

Yep. Happens here too. Because we've done it.

Difference in the UK is that it's a criminal offence if you get found out. And people often do.

You could always operate a CAO-style system where parents put down their schools in order of preference and they're awarded based on proximity.

Start collecting PPSNs and cross-referencing with revenue and DSP and you'll find that the trick of using granny's address becomes very hard to get away with.

lazygal

I know people who've put the grannies address down to get into our local schools because it's those living in the parish who get priority, not those who are baptised.
This isn't just about admission policies either. I'm dubious about certain aspects of the learn together programme and educate together schools. I'd rather know my children won't be indoctrinated in a state funded school, than have even more pointless fragmentation and duplication of schools on religious and gender grounds.

silverharp

lazygal wrote: »

I know people who've put the grannies address down to get into our local schools because it's those living in the parish who get priority, not those who are baptised.
This isn't just about admission policies either. I'm dubious about certain aspects of the learn together programme and educate together schools. I'd rather know my children won't be indoctrinated in a state funded school, than have even more pointless fragmentation and duplication of schools on religious and gender grounds.

I started by just saying to my kids there is no god and they accept that. Recently I started showing my eldest all the atheists YouTube channels and general science programmes and he finds them interesting , debunking Noah and the rest, it makes him think about science history ethics etc.
If they are stuck in a class where god does and says stuff then it will teach them to be critical and not just believe things because the teacher says it.

Qualitymark

I know people in London who moved house because they wanted their children to attend an excellent school. Not rich people.