Grounds for Sec29 appeal to DoEd refusal to enrol into secondary school.



I would consider the above policy to be unfair. It makes no distinction between kids who are living in the area where this is their local school and kids who may be living a long distance from the school who have other options in their own areas. Essentially they are saying that a kid who lives 30 miles away has the same chance of getting in to the school as one who lives 30yds away.
 
Its fair to the child 30 miles away? Is there any rule/statute about getting priority in a closer school? I don't think so.
 
AlbacoreA said:
Its fair to the child 30 miles away? Is there any rule/statute about getting priority in a closer school? I don't think so.
Click to expand...

I assume schools who participate in the state funded free education scheme must adhere to some rules or guidelines. I would be very surprised if there wasnt some rule or guideline obligating them to be of benefit to the local community. An admissions policy may be invalid if it is contrary to the overall conditions of participation in the free education scheme or any other funding conditions that the school is under e.g. in return for capital investment by the state.
 
Found it

Under Section 15(f) of the Education Act 1998, a schools Board of Management has a statutory obligation to have regard to the community served by the school etc. - extract below:

"(f) have regard to the efficient use of resources (and, in particular, the efficient use of grants provided under section 12 ), the public interest in the affairs of the school and accountability to students, their parents, the patron, staff and the community served by the school, and"
 
Interesting. Though it could be argued that 30 miles is the community served by the school.
 
AlbacoreA said:
Interesting. Though it could be argued that 30 miles is the community served by the school.
Click to expand...

Your correct - in some remote parts of the country where there is a very low population density and very few schools, this argument could be made. However, for 90% plus of the country, it would be a much smaller distance - possibly even less than 1 mile in parts of Dublin in the case of catholic schools as the catchment areas couldnt really overlap that much with those of other catholic schools nearby.
 
In my specific case the two schools are close within probably a mile of each other. But separated by a natural boundary, and they've decided one estate has to go across the physical boundary, with other areas not connected to it. The estates and community actually connected to this estate go to the other school. Which if all well and good, unless your kids are being separated from their peers in the community and perhaps other family in the same community.

The reason for the split, being if they drop the length of residency rules they can't cater for the numbers that are then eligible in the existing catchment. The reason for dropping length of residency criteria is to avoid any claim of discrimination due to lack of "diversity" in the existing population vs new population in the area.

Of course the solution is simply to move, rent or otherwise in the new catchment, since length of residency is no longer a bar, if you've money to do that.
 

This is a very weak and, in my opinion, unenforceable section.
"Have regard to" doesn't mean much and then the "community served by the school" doesn't necessarily mean location, it can mean families, religious ethos etc it's way too broad. It's typical wishy-washy legislation that is basically a godsend to the legal profession, no-one else will benefit from that section.
 
The problem is schools aren't always built in the right place, center of their catchment. So the community it serves might not be a clean circle from the school. Thus distance to the school doesn't always define the catchment, or the community it serves. This is partly down to planning, schools often are put where space is available, where developers don't want, rather than compulsorily purchased center of the catchment to serve the community.As a result these enrollment policies are a nightmare, as catchment change as they are allowed to overdevelop areas and overload existing schools and resources.
 
If you really want to get your child into a specific that is near but you fall outside the categories/policies of the school, would it be worthwhile to rent a property for 6 mts there if it will enable you to get it. This may be beneficial in the long run esp if there are other younger syblings to follow along.
 
ajapale said:
No, because as pointed out above most schools in this juristiction (including the OP's school) do not operate a catchement area policy.
Click to expand...

Not sure about this. Most of the schools in my area do operate a catchment area - usually defined as the parish the school is located on, or in the case of the bigger schools, 2-3 local parishes. I expect that due to the requirements of the Education Act, most schools are like this - have some sort of defined catchment area. The school referred to by the OP may be atypical in not having an area and this may be contrary to the Education Act.
 
csirl said:
The school referred to by the OP may be atypical in not having an area.
Click to expand...

Hi Csirl,

Are you talking about seconday schools here?

I have seen this "boiler plate" policy operated by several large secondary schools in the West and South of the country.

Outside the very large cities secondary schools typically accept students very large geographical areas.


aj
 
You can't plan around changes in enrollment policies.

We've been completely wrong footed by the change in ours.
 

Giving a preference to a child of a particular religious background is against the equality law is it not?

As are the other priorities you gave. Child of a teacher, is this not unfair? That's discrimination on the basis of who your parents are, as is the sister one.


I believe that if any of those reasons were given in a job recruitment process then they'd be in breach of equality legislation.
 
This is kinda interesting...


Its only an extract from the full details. Read the link to put it in context.
 

The legislation covers all types of public education system schools, so would include secondary.

The OPs situation is that her child is not being enrolled in a school that is close to where she lives. It would be difficult for them to argue that the child is not within the community the school serves. For children living a long way away, there is scope for arguing that the children are not part of the community (and so have no 'automatic' right to attend the school, but may be accepted if spaces available).

The OP is looking for suggestions on how to appeal the refusal - if it were me, I'd appeal on the basis that the admissions policy is invalid as it does not have any regard to the community the school is located in. This may force the school to introduce a defined catchment area which, as the OP is close by, would significantly increase her chances of having her child enrolled.
 
Thanks csirl, I think I understand the point you are making now.

I know in Limerick City they operate a unique type of CAO enrollment policy for secondary schools.

aj
 

Just by way of update here.

Eventually another secondary school in the town accepted a late application from us and "out of respect for us being natives of the town" gave us a place. We were and will continue to be very grateful to this school and my daughter has settled in fantastically so all worked out well.

The reason I update here is that the other school to which we applied originally had its open night for entry to their school in Sept 12 last night and their enrolment policy has reverted back to automatic entry of children of past pupils.

I feel so angry that we just happened to be seeking entry the one year that this policy was done away with. I asked last year if I kept my daughter back a year would I get a place and was told there was no guarantee.

Do any of the "legal eagles" out there see any ground for indirect age discrimination ie all 11-12 year old children of past pupils were discriminated against last year - they were not the previous year or indeed this year?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register