Dance and Drama Awards

[Ecarte]

I'm not sure, and hope that this was not the implication.

 

Hopefully what was meant is that talent regardless of parental income should be recognised and nurtured.

 

Equality of access to good quality training is what is required.

[tomuchtallent]

I'm sure there are lots of international dancers who can pay full fees, that must be why schools audition abroad and I'm sure they are super talented. Schools need to fill their places with the best students and also make money to survive.

[taxi4ballet]

Agree, tomuchtalent - the schools have to fill their places, or they would go out of business. If, however, the best students can't afford it, then what?

[tomuchtallent]

The most talented in the Uk will be offered funding first and there are those that can pay,then international places will be filled.All will be to the highest standard required for that school, and there will be more than enough.So the schools still get there money and still have the best students.Maybe I'm wrong!

[balletla]

I think it is moving onto dangerous ground to imply that the dancers whose parents can afford to pay are less talented than those who need funding.

I don't know why it's "dangerous ground". If for example, Tring takes 12 children onto the dance course in year 7 but there are only 5 MDS funded places, surely the most talented are given the funded places? The remaining 7 children have to pay full price. This system is not perfect but it tries to give the proportionate funding fairly to a funded place, for the most talented, through the MDS scheme, althought there will always be some who still can't afford to go with MDS.

 

Where funding is skewed disproportionately towards lower earners, this changes the balance entirely and erodes standards because:

i) the funded places all go to lower earners (who may not necessarily be the most talented)

ii) some of the most exceptionally talented children may not be able to get a funded place because their parents earn too much but still can't afford a place because the funding levels cut off disproportionately as in the new DaDa system.

This makes a mockery of the Department of Education's claim that their aim is to give funding to the most talented and likely to succeed and actually makes funding less likely to go to the most talented in all cases.

 

Personally I have always used a funded place (not how much funding you receive)* as an indication of talent and what I am now extremely worried about is that my DD may be offered a 6th form place and because I am over the DaDa threshold, I won't know whether it is because she is the most talented or because she just the most talented out of a bunch of people who can pay (not that I can pay and would have to turn it down so that the next in line could be offered it). I am suspicious because I have already been asked for financial information prior to the final. Therefore, you are right about it being a dangerous assumption with the new DaDa scheme.

 

Edited to say that: *It is a difficult distinction, but all places at RBS are 'funded'. Some of the parents won't receive any funding because they earn too much but at least they know their child was selected purely on talent, regardless of ability to pay.

Edited February 8, 2013 by Ribbons

[Dragonlady]

DD has been offered a place today at Hammond 6th form but they are being a bit canny and asking us to fill in a finance form alongside the acceptance letter.  When I called the school they explained that their DADA's will be given out to the people who got the highest audition marks and those lucky people will be written to after all the auditions are over.

 

When I asked what happened to those not lucky enough to get a DADA (even if we could afford it) there was a mere hint at the fact that the school has a little leeway in funding and these other fundings for talented students may be an option for a very luck few (My DD attends the school currently on a bursery as she was a year 8 entry)  Not too much light at the end of this tunnel but if other schools are willing to look at fundings 'outside the box' then may be a few more talented middle class dancers can fulfill their dreams......................

[Tulip]

Yes a remember Hammond used to offer very generous burserys up to 50 percent which some times worked out far better financially than a MDS award depending on your income. A huge applause to Hammond for trying its best to be fair to more talented dancers.

[Jaylou62]

Well, on the plus side I now have a contact name and address! As I said previously, I contacted my MP who sent me a letter received by me to day which said 'sorry I can be of no further help'. She also attached a letter from Rt Hon David Laws, Minister of State for Schools, Sanctuary Buildings, 20 Great Smith Street, Westminster, London, SW1P 3BT Tel: 0370 000 2268 email: david.laws.MP@parliament.uk 

 

He says in his letter 'From 2013, if a student is offered an award, the level of support for fees and maintenance will be based on their families income. Mrs A is concerned that the changes to DaDA will make dance training something for the rich. This is not the case however, as the introduction of a fully means tested scheme means that students from lower income households will receive more support than they currently do and students from higher income households will have to make greater contributions themselves.

 

    The Government recognises that families work hard to support DaDA students. However, the changes to the daDA scheme are being made to ensure the right amount of financial support goes to those talented students who need it most.

 

   In relation to child benefit, all daDA students study for Trinity College qualifications which the Department for Work and Pensions classes as advanced (beyond normal further education) qualifications - this means that should Mrs A's daughter be successful in gaining a DaDA support she would not be eligible to continue to receive child benefit. Mrs A may be disappointed about this - but set against the support that DaDAs provide towards fees and maintenance at private, fee paying schools, the loss of child benefit is a relatively low figure.

   Thank you for writing on this important issue. I hope my letter has been helpful.

Yours sincerely,

 

David Laws MP

 

I have used the email address and linked it to the petition. He gets emailed every time someone signs it and knows how many people have already signed:)

I will also be emailing him directly!

[balletla]

Well done Jaylou. If you can....change the petition to his name and title.

 

Also if Trinity College qualifications are classed as "advanced" and beyond normal further education for 16-19yr olds, so that you are ineligible for child benefit, why is there no access to student loans??? As always, they want it both ways.

 

In addition to my email to the Education Funding Authority, which sits in David Laws remit and is actually the place that does the detail of the funding tiers (FundingQueries.EFA@education.gsi.gov.uk), I will be sending a new email to David Laws which I will be happy to post on here for others to copy or amend for their own use.

 

The more I look at those tables, the more I think they have been hastily done on the back of a fag packet by some policy implemetation officer who doesn't understand the implications, but had a dead line to hit.

[Lildancer96]

Asking for financial information before allocating dada awards is nothing new. We had to complete a financial declaration before attending finals at elmhurst last year .

Edited February 8, 2013 by Lildancer96

[taxi4ballet]

It's this "Private fee-paying schools" thing again, isn't it? Where are the STATE schools offering top class ballet training?

[Legseleven]

The state school offering vocational ballet training is in Scotland. However you can't attend unless you are Scottish or resident in Scotland....

I suppose it's a bit like the areas of the UK which have retained the grammar school system and are attractive to those parents with academic children who would benefit from a grammar school education. Perhaps parents of dance students should look at moving to Scotland in good time for their children to apply there.

[taxi4ballet]

Legseleven - it's good to know that at least some Scottish dancers can have this opportunity.

[Legseleven]

Sorry, my previous post was written tongue in cheek and I didn't mean to sound flippant. It is a valid point though - the only state school offering vocational dance training is in Scotland with restrictive entry requirements based on nationality/residence rather than purely on talent (I am not for one moment suggesting that the students there aren't talented). Should those students who qualify on the basis of nationality/residence for the Dance School of Scotland be able to apply for DADAs at the other UK schools and thus compete with students who are not eligible to attend Dance School of Scotland? Why should their choice not to attend the state vocational school for which they are eligible potentially deprive a student who isn't eligible to attend anything but a fee paying vocational school of a DADA?

[Legseleven]

Our posts crossed, taxi4ballet and I agree that it is good that some students can benefit from a state funded vocational training. What is annoying is that there is the reference to students applying for DADAs choosing to attend 'private fee-paying schools' - when the reality is that there is no alternative to a private fee-paying vocational school unless you are eligible for Dance School of Scotland.

[balletla]

Here is a copy of the email I am sending to the EFA and David Laws. So come on, get writing this week-end folks:

Dear Mr Laws,

I am utterly distraught and disappointed at the recent funding table that has been published for Dance and Drama Awards (DaDAs) for 2013/14.The funding tiers have not been allocated in a proportional way and effectively ‘fall off a cliff’ once income reaches £70,000 when funding ceases to be available altogether.

My daughter is an extremely talented child who wishes to continue her training in classical ballet at 16. It is imperative that she gets the right amount and right quality of very specialist training in order to attain the necessary standard to gain employment in a classical ballet company at 18. The physical requirements of purely classical ballet mean that this

specialist training has to be available at 16.

Suitability for classical ballet training is limited to a very few children who have the physical and artistic capacity necessary to succeed. In order to have reached the required standard for training at 16, a child must have spent a minimum of five years previously engaged in similar training and shown levels of focus, commitment and determination unprecedented for children of their age. Training to become a classical ballet dancer is akin to training to be an Olympic athlete in terms of the extreme physical endeavour and hours of training required.

This type of training is only provided at a handful of schools, all but two of which are funded through DaDAs. There is no alternative state-maintained or private provision and therefore the only option is to attend one of these schools. This is different to other performing arts and contemporary/community dance, which can be pursued through degree-based options

at the later age of 18, or through other further education options at 16.

My partner and I earn a combined salary of £72,000, which means that we are not eligible for any fees or maintenance funding at all. We have a net income of approx. £47k a year. Given that the combined costs of fees and maintenance for these specialist schools is approx. £26,000 a year, that would leave us with £21,000 to cover mortgage, food, bills, clothes and other living costs (i.e. a net income of less than £11,000 each) with no access to any other benefits that are determined by gross salary. The mortgage on our very modest house would take up nearly two thirds of that.

My daughter is very lucky to have been in receipt of a Music & Dance Scheme (MDS) award for her training for the last five years at a specialist school. Our contribution under that scheme has been £8,800 a year and this sum has been very difficult to find and has already involved sacrificing any luxury (e.g. family holidays) and only paying out for basic necessities.

However, under the DaDA scheme, we are now expected to find nearly triple that amount. The funding changes to DaDA are material and significant and have happened at very short notice. How is one expected to prepare for that level of change with what will be five months notice, following offer of a place? There is no access at all to any other finance; despite

the fact that you classify Trinity College qualifications as “advanced” and “beyond normal further education”, there is no access to student loans. Since there is no question of us being able to afford to pay out £26,000 a year, the five years of funded MDS training will now be completely wasted without the means to continue.

I am unclear as to how the funding policy supports your stated aim of ensuring "awards are granted to those students who are the most talented and likely to succeed in the industry". This scheme supports those from lower income households - that is not the same as supporting "the most talented and likely to succeed". The funding tables are skewed disproportionately towards lower earners and this will have the unintended consequence of restricting access rather than widening it.

Where funding is weighted disproportionately towards lower earners, this changes the balance of entry to the school and erodes standards because:

i)  all the funded places go to lower earners (who may not necessarily be the most talented)

ii) some very talented children will not be able to take up a place because their parents earn over £70,000 and cannot afford to pay out over half of their net pay in fees.

From the action you have taken in limiting funding, I can only surmise that this government does not support classical ballet training. Therefore we will see a situation where our most treasured national classical ballet companies such as the Royal Ballet and Birmingham Royal Ballet, exclusively employ ballet dancers from other countries such as Russia, China,

Japan and America, where classical training is heavily supported by the state, because those companies only take the best from around the world. If you believe, as I do, that arts and culture are crucial to the wellbeing and health of society, then this is a very sad state of affairs.

The funding tiers are beyond comprehension and as always, it is the squeezed middle earners who lose out. Therefore I implore you to look again at the allocation of this funding stream

and at the very least, smooth it more proportionately across the earning bands up to £150,000.

Yours sincerely

[JulieW]

Fantastic letter!

[Lala]

Well said. I totally am with you x

[Loulabelle]

Brilliant letter Ribbons!

[Belljul]

Brilliant letter Ribbons. I will write in the same vein this weekend. Thanks very much for sharing that!

[KathyG]

I have always felt the current DaDa system was unfair.  As I have said many times before on this forum that under the MDS scheme we paid about 4500 a year. Under the current DaDa system we have had to pay twice that 9,000 a year that is equvialent to earning 90,000 a year under MDS.  My husband works for St John's Ambulance and I work in a library so we don't earn alot not even 50 grand a year between us, we also live in Surrey which has a much higher cost of living. 

 

I would like to see the MDS scales applied to 6th form training including accomodation so those who do earn more pay more and those on lower incomes pay less.  In my DS year there are several who earn good salaries but pay alot less now for fees and accomodation than they did did under MDS. Under.he current Dada compared to MDS there are a few like us who are substantially worse off and those who earn more much better off.

 

We are also having to pay out for DS to attend auditions which is not cheap or easy. DS is currently in Canada for an audition but stuck in a storm which is restricting travel.

[balletla]

Thanks everyone. You may not agree with everything I've written or like the way I've written it, but hopefully you can pick out some key themes and tailor it for your own use. 

 

I know some may be thinking that none of this will change anything, but i do believe that the more letters that are written and the more people that sign the petition, the more noise will be generated and there is always a tiny chance that something could change.

 

Michael Gove has just announced that his big plans for scrapping GCSEs have had to be scaled back due to pressure from people telling him that they are unworkable in the time-frame. What is also clear is that a wholesale review of 16-19 education has been carried out with changes to the funding formula and A levels etc. Having ploughed through a lot of these reports and policy guidance, I can't see anything that specifically focusses on this area. There is plenty of stuff about 'vocational training' but this is the more practical education provided by schools and FE colleges, not what we would call vocational training for ballet. I am awaiting a response to an FOI request for documents relating to this area and how the new funding arrangements were arrived at, but to be honest, responses to FOI requests are usually not particularly informative.

 

Therefore, please do write to David Laws and your own MP and also keep passing on details of the petition to all your dance contacts and keep making 'noise'.

[carriecrafts]

Just trying to get my head around what this means exactly before I write to my MP and David Laws...

Am I correct in asuming that for a household on £69,000, if awarded a DaDA, the parental contribution towards to tuiton fees would be £7,175 but all boarding costs are on top of that? For a household on £71,000 the parents would pay the full fees plus the boarding costs? So the difference isn't £26,000 being stated, it is more like £8,000 based on fees of £15,000 plus £11,000 boarding costs? (I don't know the accurate breakdown for different schools), as boarding costs have to be paid even with a full DaDA? Or did the old DaDAs cover the full fees inc boarding costs?

I'm not trying to belittle the costs/differences, I just like to argue based on accurate comparisons.

My dd was offered a place at vocational school last year at 16 but didn't get a DaDA so she had to turn the place down :-( She'll try again for 2014 and being mid scale we would only have a small contribution to make for the fees but I still can't see how we could possibly pay her living costs. Most of the degree options are not much better as the student finance only covers half the tuiton fees at places like ArtsEd and Bird.

I feel we should be arguing for these schools to be brought under the student finance system which allows equal access based on merit rather than affluence. I have 2 other dds at uni, both receiving high levels of training in their chosen fields, both able to finance it with studen loans. Why should they have this option but my youngest not?

[Tulip]

Perhaps the schools could help by lowering their fees.

[Jan McNulty]

Hello Carrie and welcome to the forum.  Sorry I can't answer your query but I have signed the petition!

 

I'm sure plenty of people on this board are more qualified to chip in with answers.

[Klaris]

While I applaud everyone's efforts here I am feeling a little uncomfortable about the emphasis on high earning families.

 

It feels to me that Ribbons' extremely articulate letter may unwittingly pit low income families against high income ones for what is a finite pot of money - surely the real issue is that all talented children should have the same right to top quality vocational training regardless of parental income?

 

I do understand that the changes must be a severe blow to earners over £70k, but surely it's parity for all that really needs to be campaigned for.

 

And I also want to make the point that this sort of income will seem like a phenomenal amount to many people - including those on this forum. Families who are on a very low income - below £20k or so - do need to be supported fully because trying to find any extra money at all in these circumstances is truly impossible.

 

There is a case to argue that children of lower earners will have had less access to quality training and dance opportunities than those with higher earning parents, for all sorts of reasons- so the use of the word 'potential' alongside 'talented' is absolutely vital here. I do think the Govt have tried to recognise and help with this in recent years through things like the CAT scheme, which is for pre-vocational training.

 

I feel we should all - regardless of our incomes, be they high, medium or low - try to get the Government to support all our young dancers with talent and potential. This can only be done by introducing a scheme that allows them to train at the highest level possible with no financial bar to entry.

 

If that means in this day and age that our children have to go through the same student finance schemes as university degrees then so be it. Proper and comprehensive student finance should be made available to ALL 16+  dance schools that meet stringent criteria for vocational training - and that training should not just be in classical ballet but in musical theatre, contemporary or a combination of all.

[carriecrafts]

I agree completely Klaris,

I know of youngster who were awarded DaDAs but still had to turn down the places because the families could not afford the living costs in central London.

Some vocational students seem to be eligible for housing benefit and others not, depending on which local authority the school is in. Officially 'students' are not eligible because they can get maintenance grants/loans, but the definition of 'student' doesn't take into account the difference between uni students and Diploma students who cannot access these grants/loans.

Such a mess :-/

[balletla]

Just trying to get my head around what this means exactly before I write to my MP and David Laws...

Am I correct in asuming that for a household on £69,000, if awarded a DaDA, the parental contribution towards to tuiton fees would be £7,175 but all boarding costs are on top of that? For a household on £71,000 the parents would pay the full fees plus the boarding costs? So the difference isn't £26,000 being stated, it is more like £8,000 based on fees of £15,000 plus £11,000 boarding costs? (I don't know the accurate breakdown for different schools), as boarding costs have to be paid even with a full DaDA? Or did the old DaDAs cover the full fees inc boarding costs?

I'm not trying to belittle the costs/differences, I just like to argue based on accurate comparisons.

My dd was offered a place at vocational school last year at 16 but didn't get a DaDA so she had to turn the place down :-( She'll try again for 2014 and being mid scale we would only have a small contribution to make for the fees but I still can't see how we could possibly pay her living costs. Most of the degree options are not much better as the student finance only covers half the tuiton fees at places like ArtsEd and Bird.

I feel we should be arguing for these schools to be brought under the student finance system which allows equal access based on merit rather than affluence. I have 2 other dds at uni, both receiving high levels of training in their chosen fields, both able to finance it with studen loans. Why should they have this option but my youngest not?

Hi Carrie,

The fees and maintenance (boarding/accommodation) costs are assessed separately. The £26k in the letter is based on an average sum of those two elements e.g. at Elmhurst fees and boarding combined are £24k a year and for ENB the fees are £17k a year with accommodation typically £10k a year in a hostel, making a combined cost of £27k a year, Tring is £30k a year combined. The accommodation costs vary depending on where you are in the country and which school you end up at, but I have assumed a cost based on what others have said about accommodation costs

 

According to the tables, if you earn £70k a year, you are required to contribute £7,175 to the fees and all of the maintenance costs approx. £8-10k depending on where and what type of accommodation you have. Therefore in total, you would contribute £7,175 + £9k = approx. £16k

 

If you earn £71k a year, you would receive no help with either fees or maintenance and would have to contribute full fees and maintenance i.e. my average £26k.

 

Therefore if you earned £71k, you would have to contribute £10k more than someone who earns £1k less than you. This is why we think the tables are disproportionately weighted towards lower earners and believe that the cut off at £70k should be smoothed proportionately.

 

A second issue is that those who already scrimp to afford MDS contributions will find that they are expected to double or triple their contribution under DaDa but I don't want to focus on this too much as I don't want to do anything to jeopardise MDS funding levels.

 

Yes you are right about equal access to student loans. I don't think the government knows how to classify this training and alter their view to suit the purpose. They have is classed as 'further education for 16-19yrs' which makes it ineligible for student loans but then it is classed as 'advanced education' by Department for Work and Pensions and so you are ineligible for child benefit. What is clear is that they really haven't given it much thought at all and just deemed it a "choosing private education" which it really isn't as there is no state alternative. It's not like we've all chosen to send our children to Eton!!

[balletla]

While I applaud everyone's efforts here I am feeling a little uncomfortable about the emphasis on high earning families.

 

It feels to me that Ribbons' extremely articulate letter may unwittingly pit low income families against high income ones for what is a finite pot of money - surely the real issue is that all talented children should have the same right to top quality vocational training regardless of parental income?

 

I do understand that the changes must be a severe blow to earners over £70k, but surely it's parity for all that really needs to be campaigned for.

 

And I also want to make the point that this sort of income will seem like a phenomenal amount to many people - including those on this forum. Families who are on a very low income - below £20k or so - do need to be supported fully because trying to find any extra money at all in these circumstances is truly impossible.

 

There is a case to argue that children of lower earners will have had less access to quality training and dance opportunities than those with higher earning parents, for all sorts of reasons- so the use of the word 'potential' alongside 'talented' is absolutely vital here. I do think the Govt have tried to recognise and help with this in recent years through things like the CAT scheme, which is for pre-vocational training.

 

I feel we should all - regardless of our incomes, be they high, medium or low - try to get the Government to support all our young dancers with talent and potential. This can only be done by introducing a scheme that allows them to train at the highest level possible with no financial bar to entry.

 

If that means in this day and age that our children have to go through the same student finance schemes as university degrees then so be it. Proper and comprehensive student finance should be made available to ALL 16+  dance schools that meet stringent criteria for vocational training - and that training should not just be in classical ballet but in musical theatre, contemporary or a combination of all.

Klaris,

I am not trying to pit lower earners against higher earners. Frankly I think all of the contribution levels make it extremely difficult for anyone to afford to send their children for training. Yes we should all be campaigning to get better funding for all and access to loans and if you want to make that the focus of your letter then that would be helpful.

 

All I am doing is trying to resolve the issue of proportional funding as a short term step for September because I know that if my DD is offered a place at anywhere other than RBS or Central, she will have to turn it down as we are tied into a mortgage that we can't do anything about in the short term and won't have enough money left over for food if we even considered paying out that kind of money.

 

Please nobody think they have to copy my letter - it was only meant to highlight a few key issues. Everybody's circumstances are different. Please write a letter that expresses your personal feelings and issues - it doesn't have to be about proportional funding and the £70k cliff! It can be about overall access or the still excessively high levels of parental contribution needed at lower income levels. 

[carriecrafts]

Thanks Ribbons :-)

[balletla]

Perhaps the schools could help by lowering their fees.

 

I have heard that RBS are busy cutting staff numbers to the bone just to try and keep their costs within the amount of money they get from government MDS funded places. This funding has stayed flat for a couple of years which is great for parents who don't have to find more contribution money, but not so good for the schools who have to cover rising costs of food, utilities etc. from the same amount of money.

[Klaris]

Hi Ribbons,

 

I do realise that you're not trying to pit lower earners against higher ones, I am just concerned that this could be an unwitting consequence if the one pot of money available is spread thinner.

 

Obviously you have to try to resolve issues that affect you personally, and that is only right and proper - I am impressed by your energy and commitment, and how articulate your letter is. 

 

The whole issue of funding is such a worry for us all...

[balletla]

Yes I understand. Well given that there was no means testing last year and now there is and there are the same number of DaDA places, shows that they have already significantly cut the total budget. The extra money needed to smooth the 70k+ would be minimal as a percentage of the budget and the actual numbers of parents affected are small (as you say, not that many out of the small numbers of children getting DaDAs will have parents earning that much anyway).

 

That is why I have requested documents containing funding calculations and assumptions for DaDA funding so that I can see the figures. I think it will be small and should be able to be funded out of contingency in the budget, not affect the other tiers.

 

I know people think £70k is a lot and I should stop moaning but that is the combined earnings of 2 people who work full time. It is £35k each and less than £10k each above the average wage of £26.5k. I wouldn't do it if I thought there was any way at all we could find this money out of what is left from mortgage and bills. We don't have any other loans or anything.