Traveller family lose school admission case

[yellowfish]

So they should let everyone in? There has to be some way of deciding who gets in and who doesn't.

Where did I say they have to let everyone in? Personely i would start with those within the catchment area, if space allows they could look at 1st come 1st served with a bias towards those with children pressently attending.

Be kind enough not to invent things for me that i have not said in future.

[Clanrickard]

Where did I say they have to let everyone in? Personely i would start with those within the catchment area, if space allows they could look at 1st come 1st served with a bias towards those with children pressently attending.
Be kind enough not to invent things for me that i have not said in future.

You said "every admission should be treated equally" did you not? Either you let them all in or there is some way of deciding who does and who doesn't?

[yellowfish]

But what if they "travel" away, and the resources the school could have invested elsewhere are wasted?
Something tells me that the people involved are likely to live somewhere else within the next twelve years. I can't quite put my finger on what it is though.

The article did not specify if they were settled, several children have joined my childs school since he started as their parents have moved, do you condemn them?
I am not here to defend the traveling lifestyle, its a personel choice but it can obviously interfere with education also I know 1st hand that many travalers are involved in crime, i am not a knee jerk liberal.

But people are also individuals and we know nothing more about these people, if a travaler family were to move into my village I would expect to get equal treatment. If my child had been leapfrogged for a place because someones dad went to the school I would have taken legal advise, The travalers seem to have a just cause here and no one has refuted it except through prejudice.
I find it hard to believe if posters on here had moved to a new place and had lost out in the same way they would have simply roled over.

[yellowfish]

You said "every admission should be treated equally" did you not? Either you let them all in or there is some way of deciding who does and who doesn't?

Treated equely on an individual basis, not where your dad went or where you bend your knees on sunday, a geographical admission criteria is fine and fair.

[Clanrickard]

Treated equely on an individual basis, not where your dad went or where you bend your knees on sunday, a geographical admission criteria is fine and fair.

Maybe. But until then the school has an admissions policy which applies to all equally.

[Odyessus]

Have you missed something? Travellers generally don't live in houses, the clue is in the name.

If we are to take the word "Traveller" literally, it is hard to see how this family expects their child to be educated in a school for any length of time. Schools tend to stay in one place.

[ShankillFalls]

You said "every admission should be treated equally" did you not? Either you let them all in or there is some way of deciding who does and who doesn't?

It is the prioritising of those whose parents went to the school that is unfair - not just against Travellers but against anyone who is not one of the "in" families in the town. I do not have a problem prioritising those with siblings attending due the practical difficulties of sending siblings to different schools. I do not see this as a Traveller issue but one of keeping certain families at a higher level then others. If the school is taxpayer funded (it is) then its policy needs to be open to everyone equally - this does not mean everyone gets in but everyone gets the same chance. Admission polices are a very complex issue as almost every system has some flaw. For instance parents of adopted children can find it very hard to find places as they have already been taken by the time they become parents.

[yellowfish]

Maybe. But until then the school has an admissions policy which applies to all equally.

I think that is very debatable, basing admission on who your parents are and where they went to school is a foolish as basing it on their faith, people move around, all children should be able to apply and have a equal chance of success based on fair criterea, one of which is the catchment area. This rule would discriminate against children of imigrant parents living in a village (Thats my family btw) and give priority to a child ten miles away living next to his own village school. I am with this family on this and i would hope that anyone interested in actual equality would feel the same.

[Clanrickard]

I do not see this as a Traveller issue but one of keeping certain families at a higher level then others. If the school is taxpayer funded (it is) then its policy needs to be open to everyone equally - this does not mean everyone gets in but everyone gets the same chance.

That is my point. It should be like this but until it is every school has the right to have it's own admissions policy.

[TimBuckII]

Yes it could. But the school has an admissions policy and they used their elevated status to overturn it. This gets my goat. A "settled" family refused on the same basis has no such recourse.

FFS sake. How can a settled family be refused on the basis of discrimination against travellers?