| TALKING POINT | | | EATING OUT |  | | | EATING IN | | | | PAST TIMES | | |
|
|
|
Have your say on Durham Johnston admissions policy
A public meeting has heard from parents on both sides of the debate over admissions to Durham Johnston School. What do you think of the proposals?
Click here for the full story
12:55pm Friday 27th June 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: Fiona McGrother, Archery Rise on 6:57pm Fri 27 Jun 08
I support the objections to the new admissions criteria. Mr Williams argues that there is no entitlement to a place at Durham Johnston, however, in guaranteeing places to children in Associated Transport areas that is precisely what will be created. The potential for local children to be denied a place to a school which is within walking distance is ludicrous and frankly unacceptable. Further, in offering outlying villages the opportunity to maintain the 'historical link' with DJS, they are in fact denying local children i.e. those from St Margarets and Nevilles Cross the same privilege. I hope that the Adjudicator will recognise that these criteria lack basic common sense and overturn the decision to change the Admissions criteria.
I support the objections to the new admissions criteria. Mr Williams argues that there is no entitlement to a place at Durham Johnston, however, in guaranteeing places to children in Associated Transport areas that is precisely what will be created. The potential for local children to be denied a place to a school which is within walking distance is ludicrous and frankly unacceptable. Further, in offering outlying villages the opportunity to maintain the 'historical link' with DJS, they are in fact denying local children i.e. those from St Margarets and Nevilles Cross the same privilege. I hope that the Adjudicator will recognise that these criteria lack basic common sense and overturn the decision to change the Admissions criteria.
Posted by: Keith Bell, Sherburn Village on 9:59am Wed 2 Jul 08
I am writing to express my concern and disappointment about your recent coverage on the changes to admission criteria for Durham Johnston School.
The school has always served a community, which is made up of those living locally to the school and also those from outlying areas such as Park Hill, Bowburn, Shincliffe and Langley Moor.
The council cabinet’s decision in April was a genuine attempt to maintain the status quo when the Whinney Hill site of the school closes in September 2009 and Durham Johnston begins to operate on only one site.
Support for the maintenance of the current situation, which allows access from a wider community, has come from both the governors of Durham Johnston and the local MP.
Parents who support the changes have no desire to take places away from children who can walk to school. They just want the situation, which has existed for many years to be maintained. This was what they were promised when the rebuild of the school was originally put forward. As a result, the parents from outlying areas did not object to the closure of the lower school site at Whinney Hill. It must be understood that Durham Johnston has been and is the ‘local school’ for these new areas of associated transport.
Proximity is an important factor when it comes to school admissions but it can’t be the only one. If it was, then city dwellers would be in a much enhanced position compared to those in outlying areas with no schools within walking distance. The admissions policy of Durham Johnston has always taken account of this and the school has, quite correctly, served an extended and socially diverse community. It must continue to do so.
Your article put forward the idea that a family who live right next to the school could be "turned away". This is ridiculous. Just how many children do you think there are living in the associated transport areas? The fact that an elder sister is already at Durham Johnston adds to the likelihood of their other children being offered a place.
The photograph of the two children in the piece was a cheap device which, at best shows a disregard for the full story and at worst was an irresponsible and sloppy attempt to provoke anxiety and division in the whole school community. You really need to try harder to provide a more measured and balanced approach.
I am writing to express my concern and disappointment about your recent coverage on the changes to admission criteria for Durham Johnston School.
The school has always served a community, which is made up of those living locally to the school and also those from outlying areas such as Park Hill, Bowburn, Shincliffe and Langley Moor.
The council cabinet’s decision in April was a genuine attempt to maintain the status quo when the Whinney Hill site of the school closes in September 2009 and Durham Johnston begins to operate on only one site.
Support for the maintenance of the current situation, which allows access from a wider community, has come from both the governors of Durham Johnston and the local MP.
Parents who support the changes have no desire to take places away from children who can walk to school. They just want the situation, which has existed for many years to be maintained. This was what they were promised when the rebuild of the school was originally put forward. As a result, the parents from outlying areas did not object to the closure of the lower school site at Whinney Hill. It must be understood that Durham Johnston has been and is the ‘local school’ for these new areas of associated transport.
Proximity is an important factor when it comes to school admissions but it can’t be the only one. If it was, then city dwellers would be in a much enhanced position compared to those in outlying areas with no schools within walking distance. The admissions policy of Durham Johnston has always taken account of this and the school has, quite correctly, served an extended and socially diverse community. It must continue to do so.
Your article put forward the idea that a family who live right next to the school could be "turned away". This is ridiculous. Just how many children do you think there are living in the associated transport areas? The fact that an elder sister is already at Durham Johnston adds to the likelihood of their other children being offered a place.
The photograph of the two children in the piece was a cheap device which, at best shows a disregard for the full story and at worst was an irresponsible and sloppy attempt to provoke anxiety and division in the whole school community. You really need to try harder to provide a more measured and balanced approach.
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
