Stupid question about school admissions system

[Pinkjenny]

Dd has been offered a place at our second choice school, which is fine, but as a matter of interest, I've just contacted the council to find out why dd didn't manage to get in our first choice. They have told me that we live 2.37m away, and the last place was offered to someone who lived 1.97m away. In terms of preferences and number of people that expressed the school on their list:

1st 55
2nd 48
3rd 21

Which I thought meant that we were 5 places away from her going to that school. They told me that actually, it's three equal preferences, so over 100 people were considered equally.

WTF is the point in the preference system then? Can anyone explain it to me?

[Pinkjenny]

Thanks GiddyPickle, it's a bit clearer now.

[sunnyday123]

hi pinkjenny - think you live near me! (seen on another thread). My DD is in a catholic school near you(theres only one so i'm sure you'll guess!) and this year 6 catholics with siblings didn't get in because of this new 3 choice system - never happened before - bloody nightmare! In previous years you would probably have gotten in as the 2nd and 3rd choices wouldn't have been as significant.

[sunnyday123]

i think the 3 choices has worked negatively for people in our area as when we used to put one down, if unsuccessful the LEA gave us the next available nearest school usually but now they give you your 2nd choice (which may not be your closest) but if you meet the criteria then you get in. Thats what is so annoying that people who have it as first choice (but not a priority group) now lose out to someone who didn't really want it. Im unlikely to get my DS in next year now!

[prh47bridge]

There is no way of doing this that will satisfy everyone. If you give priority to siblings you get complaints from people who live close to the school but didn't get in because of people living further away with siblings already at the school. The objections are strongest where they feel families have moved into the area, got their eldest into the school then moved out of the area but got their younger children in on sibling priority.

On the other hand, if you give priority on distance first people with siblings complain that they didn't get in leaving them with problems getting their children to and from school.

I presume your school's priority order places siblings outside the parish/catchment area as lower priority than children within the parish/catchment area. I would imagine they prioritise siblings within the parish/catchment area over other children in the area. That is not uncommon for faith schools. From your comments I presume you live outside the parish/catchment area.

Equal preference (as the current system is known) has been compulsory for a number of years now. It isn't really that new.

I believe it is much better for parents than the "first preference first" system that many schools and LAs used to use. Under that system parents were often left with very difficult choices. Imagine parents who want their child to go to school A, which is a popular school. Their second choice is school B, also a popular school and where they have a much better chance of getting in. Under first preference first it may be that both schools fill up with children naming it as first preference. So if they put school A first and don't get in they won't get in to school B either. On the other hand if they put school B first they will probably get in but they will miss out on the possibility of getting in to school A. This means that, under first preference first, you should put a school where you stand a good chance of getting in as your first choice. If there is a school you really want for your child but which is a long shot in terms of getting a place, naming it as your first choice is a huge risk which may end up with your child missing out on all of your choices.

Under equal preference, on the other hand, the parents can safely name school A as their first choice and school B as their second. They will then get a place at school A if one is available and, if not, they will still get in to school B.

Your argument is that someone who puts your Catholic school as their second choice didn't really want it. It is true that this school wasn't their first choice but they decided that this was the school they want their child to go to if there was no place available at their first choice. So they prefer this school to all other schools bar one. I am sure that many of them would disagree with your suggestion that they didn't really want it. Indeed, for the reasons I have given above, it is quite likely that many of them would have named this school as their first preference if we were still using first preference first.

If we return to first preference first we will be back to the situation where, for many parents, the only choice that really makes any difference is the first preference. If their child doesn't get into the first preference school they probably won't get a place at any of their other preferences either. With equal preference, on the other hand, most parents get their child into one of their preferences.

[sunnyday123]

i fully understand the benefits of the 3 choice system and i'm sure its an advantage in many areas - it just works badly for us. Every year for 8 years, about 45 kids got in under catholics in catchment (siblings in catchment do not get priority - its all distance in each category) and the rest went to siblings out of catchment. However this year 75 catholics were in category 2 - this isn't just a reflection of the birth rate - its never deviated much from 45. The high number i imagine is because lots of the catholics live on the outskirts (but still within catchment) and so may not have wanted to travel the distance to the catholic school. In previous years if they hadn't got in and ticked the box saying they would consider any faith, they would have got allocated a nearby non-faith schools as all such schools in our area are not oversubscribed. By having this second choice, they have been allowed to specify the catholic school specifically. I get it works out great for them, but its bad for us as its out the blue and the school are devastated as they have never had to split siblings and even siblings within catchment didnt get in because of catholics without siblings living closer.

I'm just so disappointed as i would never have put my DD1 in if i had been aware of this at the time - the expectation (after 8 previous years) is that they always made it past siblings.

[sunnyday123]

unfortunately the school has contacted the archdiocis this year about changing the policy and they said no! Don't think they bothered before hand as all siblings got in before.