Memorandum submitted by Durham City Council
The abiding concern with the White Paper relates
to the power of institutional decision-making on admissions which
would inhibit free or equal access by youngsters from poorer backgrounds
or with low educational prospects to establishments which for
whatever reason did not wish to admit them.
In a recent article, Estelle Morris asked:
"Does anyone know any schools that change
their admissions criteria so they can take in more difficult and
under-performing children?"
That question underlies the widespread concern
that admissions policy nationally is neither fair nor equal nor
enforceable in respect of all schools.
Many examples could be given, of which the most
recent is a DfES letter of 15 November on Special Educational
Needs. That letter sets out the position with regard to parents
of children with special educational needs and the issue of parental
preference. The letter confirms that, for maintained schools,
parents have a right to name the maintained school they would
like their child to attend, and that once a Local Authority names
a particular maintained school in a child's Statement, that school
must admit the child.
The letter goes on to say:
"Since academies are independent schools
their admission arrangements are different.
Parents do not have a statutory right to express
a preference for an Academy, though they can make representations
as to the particular Academy they would like their child to attend.
Where they do, the Authority should consult the Academy and as
part of that consultation ask them whether the child's attendance
would be incompatible with the efficient education of the other
children and to consider whether there are any reasonable steps
that could be taken by the Academy or by the Local Authority to
prevent that incompatibility.
Where the Academy is of the opinion that the
child's attendance at the school would be incompatible with the
efficient education of the other children and there are no reasonable
steps that could be taken to prevent that incompatibility and,
consequently, does not consent to being named in the child's statement,
the Local Authority should not name the Academy".
All this is clearly incompatible both with the
inclusion agenda of the Government and with its aspirations to
equality of treatment of young people. It is an astonishing situation
expression of preference that parents have a right to express
a preference for a maintained school but no right even to express
a preference for an academy, let alone any right, except by decision
of the academy, to a place there. In a situation where the White
Paper envisages a greater number of Academies, the inequality
and unfairness for children with special educational needs with
regard to Academies must be clear to all concerned.
This unfairness is endemic in the current Code
of Practice on Admissions and many such examples could be given,
and the position can only be greatly exacerbated unless firm action
is taken. In a system of diverse schools, if there is no single,
consistent and enforceable approach to admissions, the losers
will be those whom some schools may be reluctant to admit or to
keep, once admitted. It is vital that admission arrangements apply
equally, consistently and fairly, and in exactly the same way
to all schools, whatever their legal categorisation, in respect
of all pupils.
|
