Catering for local students

This principle is at the heart of the legislation. The one requirement which applies equally to the enrolment schemes of State integrated schools and those of other State schools is the requirement to accord priority to applicants for whom the school is a reasonably convenient school. [Section 11PB(1)(b)] Therefore the Ministry will not approve an enrolment scheme for a State integrated school unless it makes a clear commitment to enrol students for whom the school is reasonably convenient ahead of those who live at a distance.

Note, however, that the Act acknowledges (in Section 11B) that "reasonably convenient" may have a different meaning in the context of a State integrated school from that which it has in the context of other State schools. State integrated schools, for example are likely to have a wider catchment than other State schools. But this does not alter the basic notion of "close" ahead of "distant", even though State integrated schools may have a more expansive view of "closeness".

Defining "reasonably convenient"

In order to ensure that other State schools comply with this requirement, boards must draw up a home zone with clearly defined geographic boundaries and give students who live within the zone an absolute right to enrol at the school. Boards of State integrated schools are not required to go that far but it is almost impossible to express a commitment to local students without some form of geographical criteria.

The key task for the board of a State integrated school developing an enrolment scheme is to identify the preference students for whom the school is reasonably convenient and to give these students priority in enrolment and indeed a guarantee of acceptance. At the same time, the criteria for selection must be fair and transparent (see above), and so the board will need to define the priority area as clearly as possible.

For many boards, therefore, the easiest way of gaining Ministry approval for the scheme may well be to draw up a zone with geographic boundaries and give first priority to those who live in that zone. Because State integrated schools generally draw from a wider area than other State schools, the zone is likely to be larger than the zone of other State schools of a similar class. The Ministry will not approve an unnecessarily small zone, because that would defeat the principle of the school having to cater for the needs of local students, for whom the school is reasonably convenient.

Instead of defining a geographic area, the boards of State integrated secondary schools may wish to give priority in enrolment to students who come from named feeder schools. This will be acceptable provided that the enrolment scheme does not discriminate unduly against preference students who live in the areas served by the named schools, though they do not attend them. For example, local preference students who have attended schools X and Y may be given a priority ahead of local preference students who have not attended these schools. But local preference students who did not attend schools X and Y should have a priority above distant prference students who did attend these schools.

Some boards may feel that it is simpler to just give a commitment to enrol any preference student for whom their school is the nearest State integrated school of its character and class. The Ministry would be likely to approve such a commitment but would need to be assured that the board had considered all relevant factors. A railway line, an unbridged river or a lack of direct transport services may mean that the nearest school is not in fact reasonably convenient. Furthermore, the location and capacity of other State integrated schools of the same character need to be considered. (See next section.) The Ministry is most unlikely to approve the "nearest school" principle if it is going to mean an increase in resourcing at School A, while neighbouring school B has considerable spare capacity.

The "nearest school" principle might be applicable in the case of a Catholic school, where there is likely to be a network of other Catholic schools of the same class in the same general area, but it would obviously not be sensible if there are only another two or three schools in the country of the same character and class.

Giving priority in enrolment

When the board is determining the priority order for processing applications, care must be taken in the description of the first priority group. If an absolute guarantee of enrolment is given to students in this priority group, then the group must not be so broad that it results in the school's maximum roll and/or school capacity being exceeded. Alternatively the scheme must include a method of selecting students within the priority group if there are more applicants than places available. A simple means of doing this may be to rank students in terms of their distance from the school or to allow for the selection to be by ballot. While there is no legislative requirement to give an absolute guarantee of enrolment to students within the first priority group, such a guarantee would be consistent with the guarantee given to people living in the home zone of a non-integrated State school with an enrolment scheme.

If a State integrated school operates a boarding hostel, the scheme must be so worded that hostel boarders are included in the first priority group if they are preference students. Non-preference hostel boarders should be given a higher priority than other non-preference students.

Temporary residence

If the board of a State integrated school has decided to give priority in enrolment to preference students who meet certain geographical criteria, the situation may arise where a person new to the area is living in temporary accommodation. As long as the board is satisfied of the genuineness of the situation, the student should not be treated any differently from other students who live in the priority area.

But if the board has reasonable grounds to suspect that the given address is simply an "address of convenience", which is being used as a means of gaining unfair priority in enrolment, there is provision to review the enrolment under Section 11OA(1) once attendance has begun. It would be wise to make parents aware of this at the time of application.

The board's suspicions may have been aroused if the student's given address is that of a family member, while the parents live elsewhere, or if the student will be living at a rental address which has recently been acquired and there is no other evidence suggesting that the parents are new to the area. After attendance has begun, the board may feel that there are reasonable grounds for believing that its original suspicions were well-founded (eg the student has moved out of the priority area without informing the school of the change of address). In such a case the board may decide to formally write to the parents, informing them that the enrolment is being reviewed and inviting them to offer an explanation. If no satisfactory explanation is provided, the board may annul the enrolment. Annulment is covered in a later section. (See pages 11-12.)