Schools admission criteria......

Statistically they certainly are disadvantaged.

Sadly very few children in care and on pupil premium pass the Eleven Plus. The good news for you is that it won't materially impact your daughter's chances of getting in.

A lot easier to pass the 11plus with two engaged, supportive parents and some tutoring. A lot harder for someone from a chaotic background where perhaps academic success is not really rated.
No one is saying that PP kids should get in without passing the test, but I think if they do pass the test, it should be recognised that that might have been in spite of their home background rather than because of it.
(Of course, not all PP kids come from chaotic backgrounds but the numbers of PP kids getting into grammar schools are small enough anyway, not to be a serious issue to those who feel it unfair)

I thought looked after children were always a priority so this may have also been the case for your oldest daughter?

A child who's never been tutored and is in a fairly standard inner-estate primary with parents in minimum wage jobs who passes the same exam as a child who's in a progressive primary, recieving tutoring twice a week with degree educated parents to oversee her work is arguably brighter naturally than that peer.

A Looked After Child who passes the 11+ in spite of everything @elliejjtiny describes IS inherently smarter than the equivalent child from a 'normal hard-working' family, to use the OP's judgy terms.

They're harder working, more resilient, more adaptable, more driven AND bright enough to ace the test. They are exactly the kind of young people we want to nurture into jobs that require smarts.

Passing the 11+ is the first criteria and she has done that. These other criteria are usually applied if the school is oversubscribed - so a child who is in care or PP would also need to have passed the 11+

exactly !!!!

fancy being so bitter about disadvantaged children being given priority - it’s a appropriate reasonable adjustment for very real disadvantage !!

OP states her daughter has dyslexia - presumably has a diagnosis and reasonable adjustments in place ??

utterly selfish to be moaning about kids in kids / pp …

"Long emotive stories are compelling...Oliver Twist" Are you kidding me? I parent a child with one of these so called long, emotive stories and see the reality of it. He was born to a drug addict and adopted as a toddler. He is doing really well considering, but has been helped by getting into a particularly good school (through being given priority) who have nurtured him. Your perspective promotes the notion that intergenerational unemployment and cycles of poverty are there to be perpetuated. Keep the disadvantaged where they should be and don't let them hope that they could aspire to anything.

The Admissions Code allows schools to give priority to children on pupil premium in their oversubscription criteria. Many schools don't, but some do. For those schools, children on pupil premium will indeed get a place before other children.

I think YABU.
how many kids are in care, applying for 11+ and actually passing itt? Probable not enough to tip the balance either way.

you have the option to move if you don’t like the local school as many people do/will have. Hopefully she’ll get in. She’s entitled to a school place somewhere, you don’t like it so are choosing a selective school (as I would do), so you have to dance to the beat of their drum.

who said that life was fair anyway? My local 11+ give priority to local students, ones out of town have to score higher to get in, despite there not being a local grammar. Seems unfair too but they dictate the rules.

Children on PP are not more entitled to a place at the school above other children - that isnt how PP works.

Children in care will be higher up the list than your daughter IF they pass the 11 plus. If they don't pass then they are higher up the list than children who want to go to that school but didnt pass the 11 plus if there are places still available.

If you school admissions policy is different to that then I think they are wrong.

Why should a child lose her place just because another child has an older sibling?

It therefore makes the most sense to prioritize purely based on which children get the better test scores and do away with anything else.

I think only so called “super selective” schools use nothing but test scores ie are completely agnostic as to distance etc.

Grammar schools are still within the state school system and therefore it is not unreasonable that “typical” state school criteria like distance, LAC etc apply. The pupils in the case of OP’s school have all passed the grammar school standard, so they are all smart enough to be in the school.

I think you’ll find the kids in care are the ones on the back foot. Imagine feeling hard done by over kids in care.

Long, emotive stories are very compelling (we have all read Oliver Twist), but it doesn't mean this makes a good or effective policy or achieve the end to which the means is justified.

Grammar schools are necessarily selective. The purpose of these schools is to nurture children who are smarter than others and would be more likely to go on to do the kinds of jobs we need smart people in. It therefore makes the most sense to prioritize purely based on which children get the better test scores and do away with anything else.

As I said further up the thread, efforts to make the playing field level never work in the intended way, as it's always the parents with more resources who find a way to get their child the best regardless. It's well intentioned but misguided in my view. Again, this is totally normal and to be expected as people do not love or care about or have the same obligations to other people's kids compared with their own. Every parent who isn't a crap parent does the same even if they make the right noises

But all things are not equal.

Some people take on very low-paying jobs out of choice.

But the majority are taking what they can get. They can't take better-paying jobs because:

• They have a disability
• They are caring for relatives, unpaid
• They have a lack of qualifications
• They don't have a good level of English

Any of these reasons puts their child at a disadvantage in education. Even if the parents have chosen to work very few hours - that disadvantages the child. It's not the child's fault that they've been born to parents who lack aspirations. Attending a grammar school might help those children see another way in life.

That’s interesting, thank you. I suspect the dyslexia is quite severe, then.

However, if the intervention is a TA part time, that wouldn’t necessarily mean that the EHCP would name a specific school. Just “having an EHCP” does not put a child at the top of the list for all schools, only the school (if any) that has been named.

Op, I think you are being somewhat dramatic here. At a guess, your daughter's rank amongst the kids who have met the standard isn't as comfortably high as your eldest's was.

I'm in a similar position, where after the other priorities are allocated, we'll be unlikely to get a place.

Are the other schools really 'sink schools' as you put it? We attended all of the local open evenings and were impressed by two of the local academies. They had a great range of subjects, extra curriculars, and seemed to have high expectations.

We can see our daughter doing just as well at any of them really, but she liked them, could see herself at the other two we liked, and we don't feel a tonne of pressure riding on the application. Could you phone the alternatives and ask to look around if you haven't already? It might put your mind at ease.

Maybe they should scrap PP as a direct criteria altogether and do it based on results of test Vs household income over previous 2 years. And then get a percentage from each band. So then wealthy household will be competing against wealthy households and MC Vs MC rather than pitching really poor Vs super duper struggling.

So like comprehensive schools do - mix of bands, but mix of bands based on income too.

Some children with dyslexia do get an EHCP. It’s about the need and additional support a child requires in school rather than the diagnosis.

Op, I think you are being somewhat dramatic here. At a guess, your daughter's rank amongst the kids who have met the standard isn't as comfortably high as your eldest's was.

I'm in a similar position, where after the other priorities are allocated, we'll be unlikely to get a place.

Are the other schools really 'sink schools' as you put it? We attended all of the local open evenings and were impressed by two of the local academies. They had a great range of subjects, extra curriculars, and seemed to have high expectations.

We can see our daughter doing just as well at any of them really, but she liked them, could see herself at the other two we liked, and we don't feel a tonne of pressure riding on the application. Could you phone the alternatives and ask to look around if you haven't already? It might put your mind at ease.

My neighbour’s son has an EHCP and he is dyslexic. He has a specially trained TA sit with him a couple of times a week as well.

That is typical for most state schools, grammar or otherwise.

I have not read the full thread.

It sounds like this is a school that limits entry to those who pass the 11+ (not all grammar schools do). So your daughter has passed the first hurdle.

Schools are required by law to give top priority to looked after children (i.e. children in care) and formerly looked after children. This has been the case since 2006. That aspect of the admissions criteria will definitely not have changed since your older daughter was admitted.

Schools can give priority to children receiving pupil premium, but they do not have to do so. Contrary to your latest post, there is plenty of evidence that children who qualify for pupil premium are disadvantaged. That is why pupil premium exists. Around 8% of children in grammar schools are eligible for pupil premium. If this has been added to the admission criteria since your older daughter was admitted, it will have reduced your daughter's chances of getting a place a little. However, given that you clearly were not aware that looked after and formerly looked after children had priority when your older daughter was admitted, are you really sure this is a change?

Everybody thinks their preferred school's admission criteria are unfair if they think it means their child won't get a place. There is nothing objectively unfair about these criteria.