Schools admission criteria......

Your idea that children who have a difficult background, are on pupil premium or in care for reasons outside their control must therefore be from a family that doesn’t value education as much as you do is shameful. Why should those children go to a sinkhole school when they already have disadvantages in life?
I was on pupil premium, and because of supportive policies like this, I now have a profession, a masters degree and am able to volunteer too. Because guess what, my family valued education too, but it was much less accessible to me.

I don't think it's wrong at all.
Why should my DD who will be going for 11+ Sept 2026 have a lower chance of getting in just because she doesn't have a sibling there. She will have worked just as hard as those who do. If anything, those who have a sibling there already have a slight advantage as their families have already been through the exam and process and know it better, the older sibling can help the younger with their preparations etc.

Average intake to a secondary is probably around 150 -180 per year group. The LAC children may be none or only a very few, and same for pupils premium. Most children who get into grammer have had tutoring which those families can't afford, so unless they are so bright that can get through without tutoring (and then arguably they are most deserving of one) then they are unlikely to get in. It's unlikely that more than 5-10% of spaces go to these 2 criteria so there isn't a significant impact on your daughters likelihood of getting a space.

The implication being that children in care, or for whom the school receives PP, are from families who don’t value education and shouldn’t get to go to a decent school. Children with parents who perhaps don’t work or have a negative relationship with schools themselves shouldn’t get a good education, why waste the time and energy on them. Is that what you’re saying? It very much reads that way.

All children should get to go to a decent school, regardless of their parents’ views on education. Children from disadvantaged backgrounds should be given priority entry to schools. This is about equity, not equality.

Your child isn’t more important than a child in care or whose parents don’t earn as much as you just because you really want her to go to a “good” school and her sister already goes there.

She thinks the serf should remain in their hovels and be grateful for any scraps sent their way. They should know their place!!!

If it’s anything like my daughter’s Bucks grammar, there are virtually no pupil premium kids - the % is tiny compared to the non-grammar. Social mobility isn’t a thing - it’s full of (relatively) wealthy middle class kids. I wouldn’t worry, I’m sure she will be fine and get her place - well done to her for passing her 11 plus.

Having a sibling rule for Grammar is wrong

that said isn’t it usually based on score and not just passing DD was or is this one just pass and that is it

the actual numbers from care and pupil premium will be low anyway sadly

Why didn't you put DD in care a few years ago? Have her live that life so she can get into the school?

As a child in care, she'd be top of the pile.

Would that make you happy, knowing she was living a miserable life having been through massive trauma to get to that point?

(PS You do realise how ridiculous you sound, don't you?)

You clearly don’t understand the admission criteria and are having a completely unsubstantiated rant over something that hasn’t happened yet and your target are disadvantaged kids.

If your DD has a decent score (rather than the minimum) she will get in as she is in the first category, not “bottom of the pile”.

Don't worry OP, most of those awful PP students won't pass the 11+ anyway because they don't have the financial support that you 'normal' families do to afford tutoring/private prep school etc.

Good God, I've never heard anything so awful as your attitude. Me first/I'm alright Jack. 😐

These are children you're talking about, who clearly the grammar school are trying to help. Take it up with the school governors, why don't you?

I think this is normal though? If you look at the criteria for most public schools, you’ll see similar - children in care, etc being high in the list of priorities. This is to make up for any disadvantage.

The good thing about the grammar you’re talking about is that it specifies that the priority order only applies to those that passed the 11+. I would imagine that the number of children admitted ahead of your daughter because they’re in care or have the pupil premium will be zero or very small.

As for sibling priority, that would be lower down the priorities because the whole point is the individual ability of the child (having allowed for children in care and pupil premium, as the majority of public schools do).

Really?
do you honestly think children living in a household where they have to rely on benefits are not disadvantaged? I think you could do with going back to school!

Your whole post smacks of entitlement. You are being emotive it’s not selective against sink schools. You are passing your prejudice onto your child. Lots of academy schools don’t have the same funding and privileges as selective but to label them as a sink school is frankly stupid. Pupil premium and looked after kids should come first why are you finding it hard to understand this.

Great post. Thankfully, your children did get some good luck when they were placed with you and your partner/husband.

I can't believe how mean-spirited OP is being about children in care, as though they have got some golden lottery ticket denied to her child.

I have 3 kids. 2 are twins.

All three were at different schools - drop off was a nightmare each morning especially if it was raining.

None went to sink schools - but I would question why there are sink schools in the first place? Teachers are equally qualified.

They main issue is the lack of priority parents give to schooling, given my grandmother born in 1912 was able to go to school and get a free eduction never left her -

There are too many families living on benefits and don’t have the drive to change. These are the children we should be targeting to get out of the poverty cycle. Then the whole country will benefit.

I worked in schools, I’ve heard it all, kids like to talk ‘my mom says ….’

It’s a shame when so many could do so well.

Oh the irony! Any child who IS in care or IS pupil premium is already massively on the back foot. Their life chances are already compromised. Their parents won’t be able to afford to buy or rent a house close to an oversubscribed school due to the inflated costs of such houses.
How do you suggest the system should be set up?

Look at this year’s intake. It is not likely to be a high proportion who qualify in those categories, leaving the majority of places allocated as previously. Perhaps you should be grateful that your dds do not have to overcome the challenge's other children might. Has the criteria actually changed (in which case there would have been a consultation) or did you just overlook it in dd1 case because she got in. A sibling link , if it ever existed, would often be below those categories anyway.

OP: ugh the povvos are ruining the chances of my darling Araminthia. It just so unfair the great unwashed exist and ruin the chances of my darling privileged daughter having even more advantage in life.

Kids in care will have taken priority over your other daughter as well, that has been the position for years. I'm not sure about pupil premium. But in any event, those kids won't take precedence over yours unless they also passed the 11+. Apply for the school and save the drama for later if she doesn't get a space.

So in your opinion it’s not fair that your daughter is not assessed fairly with everyone else. If you’re the child who has grown up in care, and passed from pillar to post or you’re living in poverty and sharing a room with several siblings so it’s hard to study, do you think they feel life is fair? You have to be pretty ignorant or selfish to feel those children shouldn’t have an opportunity to even up the odd’s for them.

All schools / educational establishments have criteria like this. Even Oxford runs events to try and give opportunities to less advantaged DC. My DD attended an event there this summer aimed at state school pupils who haven’t benefitted from private education etc.

Life is never fair, but you need to check your privilege. My DD has attended a state school and got all 9’s in her GCSE’s (she didn’t want to apply for the hugely oversubscribed grammars in our local area, Wallington girls etc though did turn down a 6th form place there). But I still consider she is more privileged than many as she has 2 parents (seperated) who are very interested in her education, she has her own room to study (unlike her cousins who share 4 to a bedroom), she has opportunities through her parents jobs to get work experience and she also has the benefits of connections, mainly through her dad via his job. Whilst her own life isn’t overly privileged (she lives in a flat, we are not rich) we make it clear to her that not all kids receive the benefits she has and she should always live her life knowing she’s had a leg up some kids don’t get. And be humble.

OP watch this video

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7vR3Oovhi1Q

Gee whizz , this has riled me.

I don't normally comment on the threads but how much of a back foot exactly do you think children brought up in care are on? Christ on a bike.

Don't worry, OP- with disadvantage the way it is in society there won't be very many PP students or children in care apparently unfairly ahead of your DD in the queue.

Don’t worry. The really unfair thing is that disadvantaged children are significantly less likely to pass the 11+. So she should be fine. Even without the totally fair advantage of having a sibling.

You're angry that children in care are being given first dibs entry.

Having a tantrum over this and complaining over unfairness is mind blowing!

It's normal in many schools and it is normally a very small number of pupils.

I am completely opposed to VAT on education, but your statement is ridiculous and untrue.

It hasn’t been removed ‘for the majority’.

The majority cannot afford private education.

It has removed the option for the minority of people who would be really, really stretched but could pay fees if extremely stretched and willing to sacrifice a lot.

But they aren't. Every family whose child passed (therefore is hardworking) is prioritized based on distance. Surely you see that having a sibling can make it unfair too? Kids who don't have siblings are penalized to make things more convenient for families that do, if you want to look at it that way. Also, the local grammars to us only have very few pupils meeting the ehcp, care or pupil premium criteria, can you look up the numbers? At some places you are talking less than 5 kids total in each intake

The addition of VAT to private school fees has removed that choice from a very small minority of people who were in the fortunate position to have that as a choice in the first place. Unfortunately for most of us 'normal' hard work families it has always been completely out of our reach and we have had to settle for the 'sink school' but presumably that didn't bother you as it wasn't your child affected.