top schools deny admission to many

byhookorbycrook

Over 60% of top schools limit admission to certain groups

FEE-PAYING schools have tightened their grip on the top rankings in the annual Irish Times Feeder School List published this morning.

Many of the top-ranked schools confine enrolment primarily to siblings of current pupils or children of past pupils. Many also insist on interviewing parents and most have very long waiting lists.

A department audit of admission policies earlier this year found there was no system-wide exclusion of minorities but Minister for Education Batt O'Keeffe did acknowledge that "certain subtle practices by individual schools can have the effect of discouraging particular groups from applying for places."

These groups include newcomer children, Travellers and students with special educational needs.

Of the top 25 schools in The Irish Times list, over 60 per cent limit admission to certain categories


Nice to know that our taxes pay for the well-heeled not have to mix with those who might wreck the placing on the league table:mad:

mikemac

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Many of the top-ranked schools confine enrolment primarily to siblings of current pupils or children of past pupils.

This goes on in schools all over the country, not just certain "top" schools.

If it is oversubscribed, wouldn't you agree the fairest way is to admit students who already have siblings there? I can't see a fairer way.

Oh, I know that's selective quoting on my part here, but the policy I've quoted there certainly isn't new or unique

Piste

I'm in a free school and priority is given the daughters/sisters of pupils and past pupils, as well as priority being given to Catholics. This isn't a problem with just fee paying schools.

byhookorbycrook

siblings first is of course sensible, but it's the exclusion of groups that might lower the "league table" rating that gets my dander up. If your private school of well heeled children in the leafy suburbs tends to send more children to the local uni it is seen as a mark of success. God forbid children with special needs would drag the placings down

Gyalist

Nice to know that our taxes pay for the well-heeled not have to mix with those who might wreck the placing on the league table

Have the well-heeled not paid tax on their income too?

byhookorbycrook

certainly, but my tax shouldn't subsidise their choice of fee paying school

implausible

There is a ridiculous situation in this country where some schools charge fees, yet they receive capitation from the government and their teachers' salaries are paid by the Dept of Education, while other schools are expected to survive on the bare minimum and have to fundraise to provide an education to their students.

silverharp

deemark wrote: »

There is a ridiculous situation in this country where some schools charge fees, yet they receive capitation from the government and their teachers' salaries are paid by the Dept of Education, while other schools are expected to survive on the bare minimum and have to fundraise to provide an education to their students.

I dont know, if fees were the equivalent of the UK then there would be less private schools so more facilities would have to be provided by the state.

SerialComplaint

Gyalist wrote: »

Have the well-heeled not paid tax on their income too?

Should we also pay the salaries of the doctors and nurses in the Blackrock Clinic and Mount Carmel?

miss no stars

deemark wrote: »

There is a ridiculous situation in this country where some schools charge fees, yet they receive capitation from the government and their teachers' salaries are paid by the Dept of Education, while other schools are expected to survive on the bare minimum and have to fundraise to provide an education to their students.

Say, hypothetically, those schools didn't receive those funds. Say they had to close. All the children in those schools would then be burdened onto state schools.

silverharp wrote: »

I dont know, if fees were the equivalent of the UK then there would be less private schools so more facilities would have to be provided by the state.

And facilities would be more sparse.

As someone has already said, the parents sending their kids to private schools pay tax on their income too. They're choosing to pay yet more to ensure that their child goes to a school that ticks certain boxes. They've already paid in tax for their child to be educated. Why shouldn't some of that tax money go to their children too?

No, I didn't go to a private school. But I really dislike the current begrudgery of ANYONE who happens to have a little more comfort in life, or good grief, save a little harder and spend less on luxuries so they can send their child to a particular school! What's worse is, people are begrudging CHILDREN the money for their education that every child in public schools gets.

SerialComplaint

miss no stars wrote: »

Say, hypothetically, those schools didn't receive those funds. Say they had to close. All the children in those schools would then be burdened onto state schools.

And those state schools would have all those lovely teachers salaries available to them to ensure that the pupils got a decent education.

miss no stars wrote: »

As someone has already said, the parents sending their kids to private schools pay tax on their income too. They're choosing to pay yet more to ensure that their child goes to a school that ticks certain boxes. They've already paid in tax for their child to be educated. Why shouldn't some of that tax money go to their children too?

No, I didn't go to a private school. But I really dislike the current begrudgery of ANYONE who happens to have a little more comfort in life, or good grief, save a little harder and spend less on luxuries so they can send their child to a particular school! What's worse is, people are begrudging CHILDREN the money for their education that every child in public schools gets.

It's not about begrudgery. It's about fairness and equality. IF you want a private education, then you pay the full economic cost of it, just like if you want to go to Blackrock Clinic, you pay the full cost. The state doesn't pay the salaries of the docs/nurses in the Blackrock Clinic, so why should they pay the salaries of the teachers in Blackrock College?

It is interesting to note that Battman chooses to cut substitution cover (effectively preventing teachers taking kids on tours or extra-curricular activities) but continues to pay salaries of those in private schools.

Dades

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

FEE-PAYING schools have tightened their grip on the top rankings in the annual Irish Times Feeder School List published this morning.

Tightened their grip? This makes it sound like some underhand practice. Should fee-paying schools stop trying to get their students good grades for fear of appearing to be a good school?

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Many of the top-ranked schools confine enrolment primarily to siblings of current pupils or children of past pupils. Many also insist on interviewing parents and most have very long waiting lists.

As already alluded to, this is a common practice which here has only been associated with private schools for the sake of headlines.

It always annoys me people going on about the "well heeled" and schools. As if these people just printed their own money, rather than a lot of parents who have busted their asses and sacrificed a lot to put their kids into a fee-paying school.

Sure they are subsidised by tax money, but oddly enough the parents of the kids that go there pay tax too. So maybe we should punish people who pay a lot of tax by cutting any education benefits. And sure let's take their state pension too, because by all accounts if you don't need something you apparently don't deserve it.