Powered by iPetitions - Start your online petition now

Signatures 1143 total

Page: « 1, ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, ... 23 »

  1. 401
    Name: James Tole on Jan 28, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  2. 402
    Name: Sanjay Khurmi on Jan 28, 2013
    Comments: I believe this will be discriminatory to children who are not from those of the specified faiths.
    Flag
  3. 403
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 28, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  4. 404
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 28, 2013
    Comments: Totally opposed to the proposed changes
    Flag
  5. 405
    Name: Barbara Winter on Jan 28, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  6. 406
    Name: Mrs A Hutchinson on Jan 28, 2013
    Comments: I actually was going to move to tudor grange catchment last year and pay over the odds for a house. So glad I never. Disgraceful-they are handpicking in effect who they want.
    Flag
  7. 407
    Name: Sharon Read on Jan 28, 2013
    Comments: Has any thought at all been given to our local community, how it will affect us, our house prices and the pressure on other schools in the area???
    Flag
  8. 408
    Name: Lisa Shiraz on Jan 28, 2013
    Comments: The link to 2 faith schools is a very bold statement regarding selection of children eligible for entrance into Tudor Grange in my opinion
    Flag
  9. 409
    Name: JACQUELINE SMITH on Jan 28, 2013
    Comments: I believe that it should stay catchment as top priority because the traffic is horrendous around Blossomfield Road presently so if parents bring children by car due to distance this will obviously get worse! Children should be able to walk to school. It could mean you live so close to school such as Dingle Lane but have to travel to another school? I bought my house at an inflated price because it was in the catchment is the academy going to compensate? No!! This idea is ridiculous
    Flag
  10. 410
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 28, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  11. 411
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 28, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  12. 412
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 28, 2013
    Comments: I disagree with this proposed change to Tudor Grange's admission policy for several reasons: - it appears to have been minimally publicised (I saw it only on the school website and on one week’s edition of a local newspaper) and thus appears to be a change the school is planning to bring in by the 'back door'; this indicates that it is not a true attempt at consultation – where were the communications with the school’s local community or catchment area primary schools?; - I have one child who currently attends Tudor Grange; it was a particular wish of mine that my child attends a school which actively welcomes pupils from all faiths and backgrounds; the proposed change is one which could mean much less representation from faiths other than Church of England; - as other parents have noted, many people have specifically chosen to live in the Tudor Grange catchment area, putting themselves and their families at financial disadvantage to do so; this proposed change to the admission criteria means that they have incurred what may be significant expense for no reason; - for me it is important that schools are part of their local community; this proposed change may mean that fewer children from the local community can go to their ‘local’ school and will reduce the links that the school has with the local community which I believe will be detrimental to both the school and the community. I am also concerned about what school catchment children will go to, potentially further for them to travel, as well as the potential knock-on effect for other schools.
    Flag
  13. 413
    Name: Justine Reilly on Jan 28, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  14. 414
    Name: Armin Baghini on Jan 28, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  15. 415
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 28, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  16. 416
    Name: Kerry Thompson on Jan 28, 2013
    Comments: Separate email sent outlining concerns.
    Flag
  17. 417
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 28, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  18. 418
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 29, 2013
    Comments: Apologies for signing this after the deadline, but I thought it worth signing anyway. As a parent in the TG catchment area, but with two young children who will most likely attend St Alphege anyway, I am still very disappointed with the proposed change. I believe this will detrimentally affect the community as a whole, TG itself, admissions to St Alphege and St James ... not to mention the potentially huge reduction in our house prices! Let's hope TG aren't serious about this suggestion ... and if they are, that they can at least be much more transparent and justify their decision and its effect on the local community.
    Flag
  19. 419
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 29, 2013
    Comments: I strongly oppose to this proposal, since we paid the premium to move into the area so that my children could be guaranteed a place at Tudor grange and if this proposal goes ahead my chances will be slimmer I feel that children attending st James and st alp hedge school come from outside the borough and its unfair that they will be at an advantage over us.
    Flag
  20. 420
    Name: Pippa Edwards on Jan 29, 2013
    Comments: i am against the proposed changes to the admissions policy which will leave almost half of the catchment area children without a school place. the school needs to consider its community responsibility rather than continue on its current quest to exclde
    Flag
  21. 421
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 29, 2013
    Comments: VERY wrong desicion.
    Flag
  22. 422
    Name: Jo Hand on Jan 29, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  23. 423
    Name: Simon Hand on Jan 29, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  24. 424
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 29, 2013
    Comments: I think this is so unfair. Tudor Grange is our catchment school, our community school. We moved here a few years ago at great financial cost to get our children into this school and now this happens. Tudor Grange should be responsible and ensure that catchment school children in the community get a place if they so desire.
    Flag
  25. 425
    Name: Gary Adney on Jan 29, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  26. 426
    Name: Elizabeth Moreau-Smith on Jan 29, 2013
    Comments: I have two main areas of concern. The first is pure self interest and relates to the fact that I paid a premium to live within the school cachement area and thus secure the education i wanted for my child. Thus it seems that once again we will lose out financially. However the second point regards my very real concern as to how this will affect local children. I took my degree in child education and care and so my concern here is very real and genuine. This prioritisation of feeder schools must eventually lead to scenarios where children within Solihull may have to travel considerable distance to school. This has of course alwaya been a parental choice but many families rely on their local school to facilitate the family's needs and lifestyle. A working mother needs to know that her children can travel to and from school safely. Many families will also desire their children to be educated at one establishment. In an age where we are increasingly worried about the safety of our young and fuel costs and environmental issues i find it ludicrous that this is being considered and struggle to comprehend how it benefits the Solihull community.
    Flag
  27. 427
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 29, 2013
    Comments: Why TG does not start 11+? If they are willing to take underprevilage family 's child from out of catchment, this is a best way.
    Flag
  28. 428
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 29, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  29. 429
    Name: Calista L on Jan 29, 2013
    Comments: Its ridiculous and not a word was given to the Parents. Don't the know how angry every one is getting because they haven't changed their mind.
    Flag
  30. 430
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 29, 2013
    Comments: Being a teacher I know teachers who teach at St James. Tudor Grange has formed links with this school to help improve it and bring standards up. At present it has a very small number of pupils on roll. With priority being given to the school it will soon be full especially in year 6, purely so parents can get their children into Tudor Grange. I do not know why it has formed links with St Alphege as it is already an outstanding school and has been so for many years. By all accounts it seems to be heading down a Faith school route. This is discriminatory to other faiths as it is difficult to get into faith primary schools and to pupils in the catchment area. With the number of places available being severely reduced after priority has been given to St James and St Alphege pupils I do not believe the comments written in the Solihull Observer by a Tudor Grange spokesperson 'that demographically this will not effect pupils who wish to attend the academy during the next four to five years'.
    Flag
  31. 431
    Name: Mr And Mrs Geens on Jan 29, 2013
    Comments: We are absolutely shocked. I myself attended Tudor Grange school, and have remained living in the catchment area for over 40 years, to ensure my daughter would also be able to have the opportunity to attend. I am also extremely disappointed at the short timescale this will take to be put in place, Many families will have planned well in advance to ensure they live in the catchment area, the disruption to peoples lives and plans will be immense and totally unacceptable. To now be faced with the prospect of having to consider other schools, which, as in our case definitely are not our required choice. We are totally devastated and extremely disappointed that this is even being considered.
    Flag
  32. 432
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 29, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  33. 433
    Name: Lucy Fielding on Jan 29, 2013
    Comments: Tudor Grange should not change their policy....and certainly not without a consultation process. St James & St Alphege children have St Peters to go to. Very surprised & disappointed by this news.
    Flag
  34. 434
    Name: Humaira Waheed on Jan 29, 2013
    Comments: I think it is extremely disgraceful how Tudor grange is deciding to go back in time, they need to be progressive instead of regressive and we cannot be bullied into allowing this to happen.
    Flag
  35. 435
    Name: Mesha Mistry on Jan 29, 2013
    Comments: I am angered by the fact the school has given priority to the two faith schools over children within the catchment area. My son is due to start senior school in September 2014 and the fact that he is not guaranteed a place at his local catchment school makes me concerned. We were told at the schools open day in September 2012 that we were in the catchment area. No mention about feeder schools! I cannot believe the school has made such a rash choice in such a short period of time without prior consultation or notice to local residents!
    Flag
  36. 436
    Name: Kate Edwards on Jan 29, 2013
    Comments: I am outraged by these admission changes. Is TG changing to a faith school but has failed to tell anyone? what about places for local children? after all this is still a state school even if its an Academy!
    Flag
  37. 437
    Name: Suman Kumar on Jan 30, 2013
    Comments: I think the changes are wrong and unfair
    Flag
  38. 438
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 30, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  39. 439
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 30, 2013
    Comments: What consideration has been put to the knock on effect to neighbouring schools? Is this one school effectively going to force Solihull council to review the catchment areas within the borough to accomodate their changes or perhaps a ploy to increase admissions numbers in the future by locking out current catchment?
    Flag
  40. 440
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 30, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  41. 441
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 30, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  42. 442
    Name: Julie O'Reilly on Jan 30, 2013
    Comments: Very disappointing and underhand tactics from TGA, will be very interested how they justify the new admissions policy.
    Flag
  43. 443
    Name: Samantha Parry on Jan 30, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  44. 444
    Name: Monica Sudera on Jan 30, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  45. 445
    Name: Jo W on Jan 30, 2013
    Comments: Totally unfair, seems like a done deal. We are in catchment, but on the outer edge. My eldest son has just started year 7 and was expecting my other son to also join in two years time. Concerned that siblings dont really count for much. Now I'm worried they'll both end up in different schools.
    Flag
  46. 446
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 30, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  47. 447
    Name: Manisha Singh on Jan 30, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  48. 448
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 30, 2013
    Comments: If these proposals go through Tudor Grange sets a precedent for other schools which have recently become academies. In case anybody didn't know, most secondary schools in Solihull have become academies. The church is trying to steal school places to drive up church attendance, and the Government seems to support this. We're paying taxes towards a secondary school our children won't be able to attend. This is a new scam and it will only get closed down if parents take actively oppose it.
    Flag
  49. 449
    Name: Sue Burrows on Jan 30, 2013
    Comments:
    Flag
  50. 450
    Name: Anonymous on Jan 30, 2013
    Comments: Consulation process - What consulation process?. As parents within the catchment area and children that will (hopefully) go to Tudor Grange, this decission directly affects us. Why were we not 'consulted'?
    Flag

Page: « 1, ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, ... 23 »

Sponsored links