Jump to content

Dance and Drama Awards


Millie3

Recommended Posts

I agree Primrose.

 

Additionally will it take into account other siblings? My elder non DD will be heading off to uni at the same time and we have to contribute towards her living costs as she will not get the full maintenance grant. This has to come out of taxed incomes too.

 

It seems to me that,as you say, you need to be very rich or very poor to be able to go to a vocational school.

 

I understand that schools will find out mid December if they are still going to be eligible to award DaDas, but the amount they will be allotted is not declared until mid Jan. Thereafter there will be training on how the DaDas will be allotted.

 

Bit late in the day as most auditions are well underway. No system is ideal but it seems to me that more thought needs to be applied to this.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 596
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The current vocational fees are challenging enough, even with some MDS support! I find it incredibly disappointing and frustrating to think that the new dada scheme may potentially make 16+ training even more expensive and prohibitive, especially having invested heavily over a number of years in vocational training. For those with dc's currently at the upper end of lower school, it feels a bit like moving the goal posts at the eleventh hour.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The current vocational fees are challenging enough, even with some MDS support! I find it incredibly disappointing and frustrating to think that the new dada scheme may potentially make 16+ training even more expensive and prohibitive, especially having invested heavily over a number of years in vocational training. For those with dc's currently at the upper end of lower school, it feels a bit like moving the goal posts at the eleventh hour.

So, should a Voc.trained 16 yr old be financially unable to accept coveted 16+ training purely because the goalposts moved, would they be eligible for a refund for five years wasted training?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is terrible and personally I'm so relieved my son's now graduated - we've got a decent income but could not have afforded for him to go without the funding we had. Clear cut - he just wouldn't have gone and would now be at uni rather than dancing. That's really sad ...

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without getting into politics, sadly, I don't think it is just this government. It seems that if you are really poor, you get everything paid for and if you are really rich, you probably don't need it, but the people in the middle get squeezed to within an inch of their life, trying to make things happen for their children. If you believe that culture is the sign of a civilised and progressive society then these places should be fully funded on merit, regardless of income.

 

Being poor is soul-destroying. I don't lie awake at night thinking how lucky we are :(

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being poor is soul-destroying. I don't lie awake at night thinking how lucky we are :(

 

I didn't say that if you are very poor you are lucky, just that you get all your vocational ballet school fees paid for. This at least makes it an option if you have a talented child. Yes there are many other issues associated with being poor, but here we are just talking about access to vocational ballet school training.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have just been looking at MDS means tested contributions and wondering why people seem to struggle so much and some people still decide that they can't afford training even with MDS funding. I then looked at some facts and figures:

 

From 2000 - 2010:

inflation generally rose by 29.5%

house prices rose generally by 60%

 

Therefore, whilst the MDS has award and contribution has risen by the cost of inflation each year, other living costs (predominantly mortgages) have risen disproportionately by over twice as much. The funding is done on gross income (which is assumed to rise in line with inflation) and doesn't take account of the rising cost of living and just hasn't kept pace with real life!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you factor in overall energy costs and recent spikes in food price inflation plus direct and indirect taxation then it is quite clear why families disposable incomes are at very low levels right now. Recent concerns expressed in this forum over the high level of overseas students attending vocational schools at the expense of UK nationals can only be heightened under this new regime of funding criteria.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't say that if you are very poor you are lucky, just that you get all your vocational ballet school fees paid for. This at least makes it an option if you have a talented child. Yes there are many other issues associated with being poor, but here we are just talking about access to vocational ballet school training.

And still may have to struggle to pay for travel, uniform, shoes etc etc fees are not the end of it ! Everyone has their own problems so please don't assume that it still makes it possible for your daughter/son to be able to train.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And still may have to struggle to pay for travel, uniform, shoes etc etc fees are not the end of it ! Everyone has their own problems so please don't assume that it still makes it possible for your daughter/son to be able to train.

 

And you have to be offered a few-and-far-between funded place to start with!

 

I can't help wondering how long it will be before the Government decides to cut funding altogether...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As the parent of a DD currently on the existing DADA system, we are over the threshold for any help with living expenses (£33,000 per annum) and this is due to the fact that I have to include my partners earnings, even though he is not my DD's biological father and legally does not have to contribute to her training. The financial responsibility for parents of DC's wanting to attend Upper Schools under the current system is hard enough. Unless you are lucky enough to live close to the school where they attend, then I would say that with the parental contribution to the DADA (currently £1,275 per annum), you need to have a minimum of £11,000 net income per year to pay for your training and accomodation, plus private medical, uniform, tutu's for DDs, shoes, travel and their incidental spending money on top of this.

 

It is so hard to get places at these schools, but make sure that you are realistic about how much it is going to cost before applying. I would imagine that the new system certainly won't make the money side any less than we pay now.

 

Sorry for sounding morbid about the finance side of training, but just wanted to give you an insight from the parent of a current Upper School student on a DADA.

 

Good luck everyone

LTD

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will be auditioning for 2014 entry but am slightly concerned about the family income thing. My parents are divorced, so my mum (who is on quite a low wage anyway) lives with my stepdad. My mum wouldnt want my stepdad to have to contribute towards hefty ballet school fees; would the DADA take this into account and only consider my mum's income, even though the total household income is different??

Hello swanprincess

 

Apologies if your question has been answered already, but just to advise you that your stepdad's income would be taken into consideration, even if he does not contribute to your fees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When DS started at vocational school at 11 we wondered how we would afford it and didn't even consider the cost of 6th form training, if we had he may not have gone. We are paying over twice the amount we paid when on MDS. On MDS we would need to earn nearly 80,000 a year to pay what we are currently paying out. We don't earn anywhere near that amount. Upper school funding does need changing so families who earn more pay more. We know of several who earn much more than we do and are now paying considerably less than they did under MDS now they are in receipt of a DADA. Personally I would like to see the MDS extended to 6th form training though it would be to late for us.

 

I have sent a long email into the Dept of Education asking them to publish more details about the changes. As someone else has said we should bombard them with calls and emails to see if we can get them to divulge more. Not hopeful on a reply as they say they will respond within 15 working days!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

KathyG, I think you are right that mds should continue into 6th form,someone said that schools now finish at 18,so the vocational schools should be the same.How does this work? Does everybody have to continue and do A levels at their schools now?

As for funding, it does not look good,I am seriously thinking of looking abroad even for lower schools!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point in time, I would tend to disagree with mds carrying on into 6th form, we were looking forward to possibly having some relief, should dd be fortunate enough to secure a dada, from the fees that we are currently blessed with, even with an mds ... just my opinion and in any case, however the system is set up it will always benefit some more than others and will either be perceived as fair/unfair depending on one's own circumstances.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moneypenny, I have a number of friends in the same situation as yours. In fact we too would have been potentially the same, if DADA's had continued on the current system and I have two DD's at vocational school on MDS funding.

 

I am going to make a comment (though often when I make a comment a thread then ends....but I'm not paranoid so here goes!!). The threshold of £50,000 came from a comment made at a meeting at one vocational school. Right now no one has any factual evidence of how the new scheme will work, what will be funded at what levels and who will benefit and who wont. All that said I really feel for those families with children applying for places to start in September 2013....such uncertainty is horrid and they will be searching for any little bit of evidence out there as to what will happen with funding for 2013.

 

There was a report on DADA funding a couple of years ago. In that report it was suggesting that MDS would be extended to sixth form for classical ballet (aka the RBS), and establishments offering dance and MT courses would be under scrutiny as to their performance on getting children into employment. It was recommended that the number of DADA awards may not change, but that the schools receiving funding may change depending on their outcome measures. So the most successful school with employment may receive additional awards and those school with poor employment records would receive fewer places or non at all.

 

I no longer have a copy of the report, but someone of the forum may have.

 

Like everyone else on the forum, I am waiting with anticipation to see what happens. I am also looking out to the US and other European countries for sixth form training for my girls.....for our circumstances, they may be our only option.

 

NL

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that would be a very good idea to base schools who recieve funding on future funding based on student employment figures. I am sure I have said this wrong but I think most of you will know what I am trying to say. The reason i say this is even with funding parents are still paying some of the fees which can still be significant for example my friend is still paying £10.000 per year. I would therefore hope that the student from these schoosl stood a good chance of employment at the end of their training. I am sure that this would have to be monitored over a few years to get a fair idea on average how many students were finding employment in dance within these schools. I seem to be all in a muddle trying to say what I mean ha ha sorry.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems that the government are running the DaDa accreditation process as a public sector procurement. If you click on the link, there is a document link in the page which takes you to the spread sheet that all schools had to fill in. There seems to be a big emphasis on information about how many students complete the course and where they go on to employment as a determining factor in the accreditation process. It does open up the small possibility that some of the current DaDa providers may not be accredited......or may end up with fewer awards.

 

http://www.government-online.net/education-funding-agency-dance-and-drama-award-supplier-application/

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems so Ribbons.

 

If some current DaDa providers may get less does that mean new providers could be accredited?

 

As someone whose DD is currently applying to upper schools and colleges it would have been helpful if this was all in the public arena before auditions etc... Thanks to whichever Government department is overseeing this!

 

I'm not confident that the new proposals will be in place in time for us to make informed decisions about schools and finance.

 

At the moment I am assuming the worst and that we will not qualify for anything if she were lucky enough to be offered a DaDa,and have made DD aware of our position on this. Some schools are just not feasible financially.

 

I just wonder who is able to afford unfunded places particularly in these difficult times. Talent should be nurtured regardless of household income.

 

So if someone is talented enough to be offered a DaDa but does not qualify for funding due to parental earnings does this mean that potentially the DaDa is awarded to the next most talented person down the list etc until someone is within the earnings criteria demanded?

 

Surely this runs the risk of the DaDa not rewarding pure talent alone and it is then not fit for purpose.( sorry does this qualify as a rant...I prefer to think of it as frustration!)

 

So we wait until more details are available

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If some current DaDa providers may get less does that mean new providers could be accredited?

 

That's what I was thinking! The schools must be frustrated as well; they are running audition processes without confirmation of how much funding they will receive. Any change could significantly affect their financial sustainability and future as well.

 

The changes have already been delayed a year - you would have thought that they would be far more advanced in the process than they obviously are. What a shambles - like trying to put the wheels on the cart as it runs downhill.

 

I think you are right that there is real risk that the funding won't go to the most talented children.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Surely this runs the risk of the DaDa not rewarding pure talent alone and it is then not fit for purpose.( sorry does this qualify as a rant...I prefer to think of it as frustration!)

 

 

This does seem to be the case doesnt it - begs the question is the award worth having if the most talented arent being trained? Surely its not fit for purpose any more.

 

Will await with interest to see what happens - very harsh for those in limbo this year and unsettling for those planning ahead. Lets hope they realise why the grants are in place and what the scheme is trying to achieve - quickly!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If what they've done with university funding is any measure, I don't hold out much hope :( . I saw an article which said that although students only pay back once they are earning over £21k, because they pay a fixed percentage (9%) of earnings, those who earn a lot (lawyers, doctors etc.) will pay back their loans a lot quicker and therefore pay less interest and so could pay as little as £42k whereas those who earn less, but still over £21k will end up taking much longer to pay of their loan and will accrue far more interest and some at the lower end (estimate around 10%) could end up paying as much as £100k. Around 20% will never earn over the £21k and so won't have to pay anything back.

 

Apparently the government have estimated that around 70% of students will end up paying between £65k and £85k for an average loan.

 

I suppose you could say that it is an incentive for every student to become a lawyer or a doctor, but clearly that's not possible. Yet another system which is more favourable for the very rich and the very poor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...