Schools admission criteria......

This 👏.

During Covid I lost all my hours at work and my income dropped to just literally pounds over the FSM limit. And then the vouchers were introduced and I actually ended up financially worse off than all the families on FSM who were able to get, and in some cases, substantial amounts of money towards food shops etc. One of the families who got these vouchers had 5k in savings whereas I had absolutely nothing.

Totally agree regarding looked after children and they rightfully should be at the top, but the pupil premium is not as black and white as some posters think. There are plenty of families just slightly over the limit who end up worse off after the benefits are accounted for and this should be not be ignored nor should these children be branded as privileged.

I think you have just proposed abolishing grammars? The OP is unlucky to live somewhere that still has the system. Most of the country got rid of them decades ago.

Re the 20% passing English and Maths. I wonder if this is grade 4+s, or more likely the 'good pass' at grade 5+? (Which would mean the school isn't as bad as it is made out to be )

I don't think you know how much you have helped this young woman. Well done you.

So they have to pass the 11+
Care of the local authority or post care (adopted)
Pupil premium - on UC and earning less than £7400 per year per family

How many traumatised kids who've suffered abuse and may have fasd do you think are going to pass the 11+? You think being adopted solves all the problems? They're mostly years behind their peers not ahead of them.
How many children on the poverty line do you think will be able to pass the 11+. They fund these kids for a reason because the stats show they fall behind and schools struggle to bring them up to ARE (age related) without it.
You are a spoilt princess and I find your lack of knowledge about what CLA and PP really mean offensive.

@VaccineSticker Finland is a highly homogeneous society.

This ⬆️

"Normal families" - bloody hell.

You’re making an assumption that PP children or those in care don’t come from hard working families who don’t value education. We know that educational outcomes for pupils in these groups are very low and they don’t benefit from all the 11+ tutoring etc that other children do, so it’s great that the school has prioritised them in their admissions criteria.

@VaccineSticker I agree with almost all you have said. The problem is that the OP, like many people, punch down and blame those they see as "less than" when they see a problem with our education system when they could instead campaign for a better system that works for everyone.

My daughter is adopted and the school is in receipt of PP for her. I remember a meeting very early on when we were all told she would struggle with learning and would never do as well as her peers. The fantastic head teacher replied along the lines of "not on my watch!".

She attained a pass rate and above in her SATS and is doing very well in her secondary school. A school chosen because of their nurturing and inclusive teaching.

Both schools have used PP to provide her with the level of support she needs to stay at the same level as her peers. If you were to know about the neglect she suffered and the resultant trauma, instead of resenting the additional "benefits" she gets, you would be thanking your lucky stars that your children aren't even aware of the evilness that exists let alone experienced it.

For the record, both DH and I are hardworking and earn reasonable salaries. We are also a "normal" family but it is only through having a head teacher who cared and had the funds via PP to help that my daughter has done as well as she has - I really cannot understand anyone who would think this is in unfair. Unfair is suffering neglect, being removed from everything you know and being so far behind because of that, that "normal, hardworking" people think she and other children in receipt of PP should continue to suffer.

OP give your girls a hug and be thankful they have never suffered in the way my daughter and most adopted and LAC have.

Of course. Plus the OP wants a selective school, but doesn't want any selection on social criteria.
As if these PP or LaC are having some sort of crazy privilege in life.

I can only speak for our local grammars, but the biggest concern re: admissions is private school kids, who would have been destined for private secondary, are opting for grammar places due to VAT and other PS school cost rises. When everyone on MN was shrieking ‘pay the VAT’, sadly social mobility for your average kid wasn’t being considered. Shame on Labour and anyone who believed their outright lies.

If mainstream education was good no one would compete to go to a grammar school or pay for private education in the first place.

Appalling how people are making out the OP to be a selfish person when the elephant in the room is the poor educational system.

Mainstream education should be of an excellent standards and accessible to all regardless of their needs and not a postcode lottery or whatever.
Finland has done it.

Until we shift the blame from the parents and start campaigning for better schools nothing will happen.

Oh and free breakfast clubs are not going to cut the butter . It is a sticking plaster on a bleeding wound.

Really this illustrates what is wrong with having a selective school system. If grammar schools didn't exist in OP's area, the comprehensives would certainly get better results and almost certainly would get better funding and investment. That would be much fairer for all pupils.

I know! Surely children in the care system need to be supported and protected a bit more? This thread is baffling.

Sadly I think there are real people who think this way.

DC1 failed the 11+, went to a comprehensive. Came out of there with 4 x Astar at A-Level and then got a 1st at Imperial College London. Now working full time as a scientist.

There is hope.

Also @LookingforMaryPoppins- any child who has an older sibling of the opposite sex is on the back foot, or has a sibling who’s not as academically gifted.

I have two dcs in a grammar area, but a boy and girl so as most grammars are single sex, this didn’t make any difference.

Both of mine are at the super selective grammars. This means as long as you are in the catchment, distance from the school is irrelevant. There has been complaints in the town their schools are in that it’s unfair that children from our town have got places when local children who could walk to the schools didn’t get in, because kids like mine got higher pass marks. At least your school just goes off distance regardless of what mark your dd passed with. (I do accept it must be galling to have a child pass the 11+, live across the road from a good grammar and still not get a place because it’s based on score.)

Generally it does. The children in question won't have had the chance for extra tuition, and it's probable that their parents haven't been able to buy so much by way of things like educational toys, books, computer programmes etc. When my dyslexic child was in education, I paid for specialist tuition which he found really helpful - did you do anything similar? You wouldn't have been able to if you qualified for pupil premium.

It's just about giving children in care the best start re education.

The LA are also not allowed to place them in schools that are failing. So if their local secondary is in 'special measures', then they will have to travel to the nearest school that is 'good'.

I do understand OP is just concerned for her own child though.

I know people (now early 20s) who passed the 11+, didn't get offered any grammar places and successfully appealed.

I used to be responsible for LAC in my school. The priority status they were offered was established when it was at last acknowledged how disgracefully poor the educational outcomes were for LAC, a combination of family circumstances which probably placed them at a disadvantage in the first place, then added to that trauma the appalling record of care placement for LAC, with many children being moved , usually without notice, from foster home to foster home, or childrens home, often in different areas often at short notice. A child could go to school in the morning then be met by a social worker at home time and taken to a new carer, with a probable change of school as well . Can you imagine the level of insecurity this instills in a child? This happened frequently for many children, you don’t need much imagination to realise how damaging this was to a child’s continuity of education, to their sense of security, their ability to build friendships and relationships. While not sorting out the problem of multiple foster placements the legislation gave LAC some additional educational support, school priority placements being one of them, with virtual schools, teachers having responsibility for LAC and additional funding being some of the others that at least meant that LAC childrens education is tracked, records kept, and responsibility for their education held by named people.

Anything that provides continuity, oversight and legal responsibility helps to keep these very vulnerable children safe and gives them the chance to build strong relationships, acquire personal and educational skills and reach their potential.

So you're fine with selective schools but not when they don't select your child?

It really isn't the hand full of looked after children who also bet their odds and passed the 11 plus that are the problem. The OP just needs to move closer to the school. That's what parents who want to get into successful grammar schools do. She says VAT is the reason the she isn't looking at independent schools, so if she could afford private pre-vat she can afford to move into the catchment area.

To be fair, it’s a grammar area, so the top 25-ish% have been taken out. So the not passing 20% is from what’s left. It would be interesting to see the progress 8 of those “sink” schools.