Views on new Templecarrig admission policy

Estman

I’ve just checked the admissions policy at St David’s and there is no priority given to families that are active parish members or anything along those lines. It’s policy is focused on locals and a first come first in basis.

By my calculation there are currently nearly 300 primary school children leaving each year from the 6 primary schools at the moment and this will increase to about 400 when children from the two new primary schools (Educate Together and Gael Scoil) fill up. There is also a greater demand for places in these 7 schools than there are places available even with the two new primary schools.

With Temple Carrig and St David’s each having a capacity of 120 students per year this leaves at least 160 students finishing primary level at the 7 primary schools that must go to secondary schools outside Greystones each year.

While I don’t agree with any policy that gives priority to one faith over another in any school, I think a compromise would be if Temple Carrig were to put an upper limit of say 10% of the full enrolment for each year to allow for Category 0 (staff) plus Category 1 that may apply under the CoI Active Parish Affiliation.

Wicklow Will

zanador wrote: »

The main anger is coming from some of the Catholic parents as they feel as though they signed up under false pretenses as during the campaign the CoI said that they wouldn't prioritise children of their own faith and yet they are.

The issue of whether or not there will be enough places for everyone, well only time will tell - but if even just 121 children apply for 120 places then 20 are gone straight away to CoI (ignoring the additional 12 for the moment).

Personally it doesn't effect me, but the question of prioritising on religious grounds does interest me - I believe it is discriminatory, yet it seems to be accepted here as the way things should be. It's interesting in sociological and cultural terms - and is something I don't believe will last beyond the next 30 years. So, yes TC are doing it, as are everybody else - but should they (or anyone) be allowed to? That's the important question for me.

I am very interested to see what happens once the furore dies down and people realise their children will get in. You can bet many of the ideological arguments will stop once they have a place.

Zandor, if you extrapolate on what you are saying then A) 120 minus 20 leaves 100 places for other children to enrol, I don't see anywhere that the CoI have renaged on any of their undertakings in their 2015 policy, they're still making places available to non CoI kids, they're simply ensuring that children of their own faith are not excluded by virtue of their minority status and fewer numbers versus the greater number of non CoI kids who would otherwise overwhelm their applications if there wasn't some way to prioritise CoI kids applications. To do otherwise would be akin to say C) asking the GAA (who, incidentally received far in excess of what TC will cost, from exchequer funding) to allow both the FAI and the IRFU equal and unrestrained access to Croke Park and to play their matches as and when they please, ad infinitum. Would that be fair or reasonable? What we are talking about here is Fairness. There is no "exclusion" rather a "weighting" to ensure that a minority are not excluded.

Why may I ask, did people (including RC's and non-believers) vote for the CoI to run the school if they object to the smaller number of CoI kids in the region being able to access an education influenced by their own ethos? I imagine they did so because they knew that there are smaller number of Protestant kids in the region and their own kids stand a reasonable chance of admission thereafter and will receive a good education along the lines for which schools like this are well known.

I also notice that my other point about the prevalence of the same posters here and on the thread bemoaning the awarding of the patronage to the CoI went without comment!

zanador

Yep, it's positive discrimination - and I understand why they are doing it.

My point is that I don't think ANY schools should be able to to prioritise using religion to change this would involve a complete overhaul of the patronage system which is not feasible at the moment. I am watching this question with interest on a national level.

I am not arguing about TC in particular, only to try and be factual about what is going on. I don't agree with them - but it has no relevance to me. I have a clear grasp of the facts and figures as pertain to Greystones so will put them in.

I didn't comment on the other point because I understood it as a dig of some sort but I wasn't clear as to whom it was directed. If you have a point to make please make it clearly - I don't want to assume but will happily respond to a direct question!

Wicklow Will

Estman wrote: »

I’ve just checked the admissions policy at St David’s and there is no priority given to families that are active parish members or anything along those lines. It’s policy is focused on locals and a first come first in basis.

By my calculation there are currently nearly 300 primary school children leaving each year from the 6 primary schools at the moment and this will increase to about 400 when children from the two new primary schools (Educate Together and Gael Scoil) fill up. There is also a greater demand for places in these 7 schools than there are places available even with the two new primary schools.

With Temple Carrig and St David’s each having a capacity of 120 students per year this leaves at least 160 students finishing primary level at the 7 primary schools that must go to secondary schools outside Greystones each year.

While I don’t agree with any policy that gives priority to one faith over another in any school, I think a compromise would be if Temple Carrig were to put an upper limit of say 10% of the full enrolment for each year to allow for Category 0 (staff) plus Category 1 that may apply under the CoI Active Parish Affiliation.

Eastman, if you check again you'll see that in St. David's admission policy priority is given to kids of staff /management - who get automatic admission and to siblings of existing students. This then extends to kids of people living in the Roman Catholic parishes surrounding Greystones.

As far as I'm concerned it's a Roman Catholic school and they have the prerogative to set their policies as they chose as I'm perfectly sure they wouldn't turn down a Protestant kid if they had the place available.

Incidentally, it's worth noting the following paragraph in St. David's admission policy " Total school enrolment is determined annually by the Board of Management as is the right of a Board of Management. This is to safeguard the health and safety of all in the confined area of the school and ensure the best possible educational provision for each student.

St David’s Secondary School, Greystones, Co. Wicklow welcomes all students for whom the school can provide an appropriate education (subject to the proviso highlighted above) "

Am I right in suggesting that they, the BOM of St. David's, give themselves far greater and less transparent leeway in deciding who they admit to the student cohort than TC BOM. I think I just might be.... But I don't hear too many decrying this fact! For the record I'm one of these happy to concede this right to the BOMs as they are the bodies charged with managing the affairs in the best interests of all concerned. In practice they are generally populated by fair-minded, reasonable and conscientious individuals who do their best to be accommodating and fair to all concerned. Why can people not trust to these peoples' obvious civic minded spirits in making these decisions? The BOMs are unpaid for this service (except for the principal) and give of their time and energy free-of-charge to run the schools.

recedite

FirstIn wrote: »

Sorry. You've lost me there. The eldest child part. The 12 extra (wrongly in my opinion preferential places) what says they will go to the eldest child of a fsmily as you said? Surely these places could go to a families youngest or second or whatever child.

Basically this mechanism is to take preferred people out of Cat 2 and propel them ahead of those ordinary locals in Cat 1.
The younger siblings of the 12 will not be in Cat 2. They will be in Cat 0.
Cat 0 is a new category for 2015 which has already been placed ahead of Cat 1.
At this stage you might wonder why Cat I is still called the first category when there are so many ahead of it. The answer is that it looks better to be able to say all seven local primary schools are still equally in Cat 1, the first category, and this is technically correct, even if it is now meaningless.
And the more confusing it is for "the detractors" the better. When they are refused a place, the less they know, the less they have to complain about.

Wicklow Will wrote: »

Why can people not trust to these peoples' obvious civic minded spirits in making these decisions?

LOL see above

FirstIn

So there is nothing that says the 12 must be the eldest as you said. So you are scaremongering. You are saying non truths recedite.

Shazerina

Here's a section from the admissions policy for the ET secondary school opening in D15 in sept:
Priority 1
Students who reside permanently in named housing estates or streets in Castaheany, Ongar, Hansfield, Phibblestown and Littlepace (see appendix 1).
Students who satisfy any of the above criteria have automatic access if places are available in the school. If the number of applications exceeds the number of places available, a process of random selection will apply. The remainder will be placed on a waiting list.
Priority 2
Students who at time of application attend an Educate Together national school.
Priority 3
All other applicants.

Seems fair... Although personally I think ET secondary schools need to give first priority to ET primary attendees. Seeing as each needs to look after its own and all that...

cocker5

Not sure what all the fuss is about really.... storm in a tea cup.

:rolleyes:

recedite

That's the thing about discrimination. The people who are advantaged by it can never understand what all the fuss is about.
The people who are disadvantaged always seem to be whingeing and looking for their rights.

recedite

FirstIn wrote: »

So you are scaremongering. You are saying non truths recedite.

I tried as well as I could to explain it to you.

cocker5

recedite wrote: »

That's the thing about discrimination. The people who are advantaged by it can never understand what all the fuss is about.
The people who are disadvantaged always seem to be whingeing and looking for their rights.

Im not advantaged by it what so ever.... it makes no diffrence to me.

As far as I can see the same/very similar rules apply in all Faith lead schools.... not just in COI schools so what's the shock in this case...

If people dont like it then maybe educate together is the way forward for your family.

At the end of the day you make the decision to apply / send your children to a certain school as a result you abide by their rules / admission rules... its quiet simple to me...

Its not like there is only one school in Greystones / Delgany... there are a few so make your choice based on your needs / wants for your child and then abide by thier rules... whatever that may be ... catholic, COI or other.

Honestly have we not more important things to be worrying about in this day and age apart from squabbling over admission rules (which all schools have I might add) is crazy - just in my opinion.

:rolleyes:

Annasopra

recedite wrote: »

That's the thing about discrimination. The people who are advantaged by it can never understand what all the fuss is about.
The people who are disadvantaged always seem to be whingeing and looking for their rights.

Who is disadvantaged by it in this case?

milosh

Estman wrote: »

I’ve just checked the admissions policy at St David’s and there is no priority given to families that are active parish members or anything along those lines. It’s policy is focused on locals and a first come first in basis.

By my calculation there are currently nearly 300 primary school children leaving each year from the 6 primary schools at the moment and this will increase to about 400 when children from the two new primary schools (Educate Together and Gael Scoil) fill up. There is also a greater demand for places in these 7 schools than there are places available even with the two new primary schools.

With Temple Carrig and St David’s each having a capacity of 120 students per year this leaves at least 160 students finishing primary level at the 7 primary schools that must go to secondary schools outside Greystones each year.

Realistically, at least 100 of the parents of these kids will still choose to send their kids to school outside of Greystones because of tradition, demand for fee paying schools, demand for a single sex education, reputation etc. I would think that many CoI parents will still choose St. Andrews and a large number of Greystones kids will still go to Pres and the Loreto schools.

While I think it is only right to prioritise places for active Protestant families, I don't think that it can be claimed that all the other schools discriminate in their admissions policies. Pres operates 2 lists, one for siblings and sons of past pupils and one for everyone else on a first come first served basis, regardless of religion. David's makes no mention of prioritising Catholics. Loreto prioritises it's junior school then it is first come first served as far as I know. Most of these school's intake mirror the population (by religion).

stilltryingit

cocker5 wrote: »

Im not advantaged by it what so ever.... it makes no diffrence to me.

As far as I can see the same/very similar rules apply in all Faith lead schools.... not just in COI schools so what's the shock in this case...

If people dont like it then maybe educate together is the way forward for your family.

At the end of the day you make the decision to apply / send your children to a certain school as a result you abide by their rules / admission rules... its quiet simple to me...

Its not like there is only one school in Greystones / Delgany... there are a few so make your choice based on your needs / wants for your child and then abide by thier rules... whatever that may be ... catholic, COI or other.

Honestly have we not more important things to be worrying about in this day and age apart from squabbling over admission rules (which all schools have I might add) is crazy - just in my opinion.

:rolleyes:

The issue is that people believe that this new admission policy for 2015 departs from the commitment given at the outset to give equal access to children from the 7 local schools.There was no problem with the policy in place for 2014 admissions as it upheld this commitment.

cocker5

stilltryingit wrote: »

The issue is that people believe that this new admission policy for 2015 departs from the commitment given at the outset to give equal access to children from the 7 local schools.There was no problem with the policy in place for 2014 admissions as it upheld this commitment.

Ok fair enough, but in reality polices change / adapt etc its a fact of life.

Lets be realistic here its not like a child will be denied access to all the schools in the area and therefore denied an education it is?

Come on I'm sure all the schools in the area are equally as good etc so the child will still get a place in school and with it an education....

I still go back to my point have people nothing more serious to worry about in this day and age.

Being denied an education is one thing but changing a admission policy for a school causing this much distress in another level altogether - this is ridiclous IMO

recedite

Migrant advocacy group calls for an end to religious discrimination in school admission policies.

The example in the article refers to a privately owned RC school.
St Davids in Greystones, which is also a privately owned RC school, is to be commended for dropping the religious discrimination which was written into its admission policy up until a few years ago.
The new publicly funded school Templecarrig is wholly owned by the State, and only managed by the COI. They are stepping back into the past to dredge up prejudices which were once acceptable, and trying to introduce these into a new 21st century publicly owned school system.

In other parts of the country where the COI is less influential, there will be new State owned schools built with tax money raised in part from local members of the COI. If such a school was handed over to a RC patron to manage, those local COI members would find themselves at the other end of the stick, and would no doubt be campaigning against any discrimination in the admission policy. Some would choose a COI boarding school anyway, but others would prefer to attend a local State school if they could get admission to it.

Far better if the State treats all citizens equally; up until now, no school owned by the State has ever enforced a policy of religious discrimination. Even many of the schools owned by the religious are phasing it out.

FirstIn

Don't kid youself here ,
According to an earlier post St David's is way under capacity. I'd bet my bottom dollar that if they were over subscribed you would see a change to their admission policy.

stilltryingit

FirstIn wrote: »

Don't kid youself here ,
According to an earlier post St David's is way under capacity. I'd bet my bottom dollar that if they were over subscribed you would see a change to their admission policy.

It's possible that St David's might introduce criteria to select if they were over subscribed. However the key difference is that they did not get the patronage of that school by stating that they would not use religious affiliation as a criterion for selection. I imagine that St David's was also funded by the Catholic church either through provision of the site or a contribution to building costs. TC is different as it is entirely state funded and in the patronage campaign they gave people to believe that they would allow equal access to children from the 7 feeder schools no matter what their religion.

FirstIn

St David's is very very close to 100% state funded.

Without the state neither school would exist. Simple.

And as has been shown in plenty of the previous posts only the niaive believed that this faith based school wouldn't prioritise their own faith to some degree. It's a faith based school at the end of the day.

stilltryingit

FirstIn wrote: »

St David's is very very close to 100% state funded.

Without the state neither school would exist. Simple.

And as has been shown in plenty of the previous posts only the niaive believed that this faith based school wouldn't prioritise their own faith to some degree. It's a faith based school at the end of the day.

I think it's a matter of trust rather than naiveté. People asked questions and were given answers and assurances at meetings and in person. What is proposed for 2015 does not honour those assurances. I suppose it's all a bit too like politics at this stage, promises are made, manifestos issued and once the vote has been obtained there is no follow through.I expected more from COI and yes, in hindsight,maybe that was naive.

potpourri

FirstIn wrote: »

St David's is very very close to 100% state funded.

Without the state neither school would exist. Simple.

And as has been shown in plenty of the previous posts only the niaive believed that this faith based school wouldn't prioritise their own faith to some degree. It's a faith based school at the end of the day.

As pointed out earlier St David's school does not include priority for members of any religion.
Also, the reality is that patronage was sought on the basis of equal access for children from all seven local schools.
There is a basic issue here of trust.

loyatemu

potpourri wrote: »

As pointed out earlier St David's school does not include priority for members of any religion.

they don't have to - the school has been undersubscribed for years - everyone who applies gets in.

they also don't have to worry about their "ethos" as even in Greystones the majority of kids coming out of 6th class are Catholic.

sinkadinka

The point is that when COI were looking for support to win patronage of the secondary they reiterated at their meeting in st Patrick's that the admissions policy would not be based on religious denomination. They have regaled on this and they should be made to revert their admissions policy back to what they led people believe they were supporting ie a secondary school for the seven feeder schools in Greystones regardless of religious denomination. Whilst I accept they have to have some restrictions in place in the event of over subscription, why can't they put in a lottery system which would mean everyone would have a fair chance. I feel very let down by the way this is turning out, I have 2 kids whom I was planning on sending to Templecarrig but now I feel they won't get a place based on the new admissions policy.

Alan_P

loyatemu wrote: »

they don't have to - the school has been undersubscribed for years - everyone who applies gets in.

That's not true. My daughter was refused a place in St. David's in 2012, on the grounds it was full.

Cheeky Chops

Alan_P wrote: »

That's not true. My daughter was refused a place in St. David's in 2012, on the grounds it was full.

Alan what on earth were your options then? Awful.

I've heard David's do entrance exams. What are these and are TC doing them as well?

FirstIn

Great news re St David's being full. (Obviously not for the earlier contributor)

With TC opening and St David's running at capacity then surely all the kids from the 7 local schools wanting to be schooled locally will be catered for.

Remember a lot of local kids go to the private dart line secondary schools and i imagine that will continue when TC opens. Anyone getting the 8am train will back me on that! It is packed with kids going to these schools.

I don't think there's anything to worry about.

Cheeky Chops

Just to give you an example of one Greystones 6th class. 3 are going to fee paying schools, 27 to TC and 1 to David's.

Alan_P

Cheeky Chops wrote: »

Alan what on earth were your options then? Awful.

David's wasn't our first choice anyway, so it wasn't a big issue. But I did wonder what we'd have done if she hadn't had a place somewhere else.

recedite

FirstIn wrote: »

I don't think there's anything to worry about.

Not for you anyway, you''ll be first in on the basis of the religious discrimination.
The bottom line is; discrimination on the grounds of race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation is always unacceptable where something is in public ownership and is publicly funded.

liamf

Cheeky Chops wrote: »

I've heard David's do entrance exams. What are these and are TC doing them as well?

A lot of schools do these *after* places have been allocated, its not that unusual.

Their purpose is not student selection. Their purpose - in principle - is to assess the level of the new students in the core subjects since this tends to vary a bit depending on which national school they have come from, and give the schools a view on which of the incoming students might need extra help.

I don't know if TC will do this.