Schools admission criteria......

To be fair, I don't think anyone has said that. Really the responses are to the OP's posts and her statements about disadvantaged children.
What you've rightly emphasised though, is the importance of parental engagement and cultural capital. Which many children don't have.

I know, I know. But almost every response in almost every post about grammar school is that EVERYONE gets tutored and there is NO WAY of getting in without a tutor etc. is nonsense. It's not fair. Some of us make the effort to spend time with our children, talk to them, do educational and cultural things with them, teach them, enrich them. And THAT probably has a much greater effect than the paid tutoring some get.

Of course it's "doable", @duckydoo234 .
It's just that some children don't have the parents or the home life that even facilities that.
Some children have never been given a toothbrush or held a knife and fork or helped in any way, socially or emotionally.
No-one on here is suggesting that everyone who succeeds is very privileged. We all know that. However, unfortunately there is a huge gap in society and doing a small amount to address that is not "dragging down" anyone else, to quote the OP.

Just looked at the figures for my DS's old grammar school and the number of PP funded pupils is approx 10 out of a year group of 180 pupils. My DS would have been one of those ten. He scored 326 and the pass mark is 304. I don't believe he stole a place from a "normal" child. There was so PP/LAC priority when he applied for entry in 2016 - they have only changed the policy in recent years.

Can't believe OP is still describing my family as not normal just because my DC are adopted. I can assure you we are quite normal, hardworking , financially secure and have always placed a huge importance of education. DH is an accountant and I was a SAHM and now an elected local councillor and community volunteer. My DS now works in finance in London and my DD is studying a level three qualification at college.

Also it's absolute garbage that school trip costs are inflated to allow PP kids to pay less. We paid exactly the same as everyone else. We were occasionally offered vouchers for enrichment type activities at school holiday clubs but I always refused them because we had the means to pay for that type of stuff ourselves.

I used to say to school that we didn't need financial help. What we needed was teachers/pastoral staff trained in the specifics of supporting adopted children with trauma issues. They would not spend the money on it. Easier to give out vouchers we didn't need as a tick box exercise.

We actually never saw a penny of the PP funding spent on my DS even when I asked for specific help when he was struggling emotionally with something related to his adoption history.

I entirely agree with the ethos of this thread. Yes, obviously children at a major disadvantage should be given a bit of leeway in a system designed against them.

But, just one comment, both of my children have got places at a super selective grammar (which, btw, allocates 15% of places to children on free school meals - which is admirable and the correct thing to do) but have had no formal/private tutoring. We're not on free school meals. But I wanted the best for their education, and have put in the time and effort at home over many years, and between ability and effort, both have been successful.

So it's doable. It's not just about ability to pay for tutors. To be honest, I think recognising the child's natural ability and the parent(s) working with that, will be more successful than farming them out at an hourly rate. Of course, many parents are not in a position to do that, hence the allowances for some kids.

Summary: yes, some kids need a helping hand, but not all that succeed in this system are privileged and have bought their way in.

Just looked that up for my daughters preferred grammar. A child in our street and my daughter both going for a place in a specific grammer, they has a sibling in that school. Could end up with the situation that they potentially get in with a score lower than my daughter (if both over 121) just because her sister goes there. They already have a slight advantage based on having gone through process already. It's ridiculous.

You do imo and I commend you for it.

Bucks Grammar schools have sibling policies as do a few London ones.
Bucks you have to achieve 121 (qualifying score)

I'm not really in that situation at all, we have comfortable finances and in a comprehensive school system, probably far more likely you own than this grammar school bare knuckle fight in other areas of England.

It just struck me as unfair that those who are just beyond this threshold now have the disadvantage of being poor, of not having access to tutors and, now, less likely to get into the school they have applied for. The thing which annoyed me was this strategy employed by some posters to talk about pp students on one hand and middle class students on the other, forgetting the gulf in-between.

Anyway, I don't have a dog in this fight.

Not the most intelligent.

I actually get where you're coming from.

There are people who don't earn a lot but earn too much for benefits.

In Scotland we have EMA which is Educational Maintenance Allowance for pupils who want to stay at school beyond 4th year (16+, not sure what year that is in England, the year after GCEs I think). They get an allowance every week depending on parental income.

Mine didn't get it but stayed on anyway and I felt that I had to give them the equivalent amount but we were skint! It was really frustrating at the time.

However, my youngest son's GF got it and she now has a degree and has just got 100% in a new qualification she studied for. (They have been with each other since they were 15, now she's 30, and he will be at the end of the year). They own their home and have a great life together.

Both my children are now in professional roles. The privilege they had wasn't money (as we didn't have any really), it was seeing us both go out to work every day - and thinking that is normal. His GF didn't have that, but that little bit of money let her see that she could do better than her parents (she loves them anyway).

Your children will see that too.

The best thing one of my children said to me was "I just want what you two have, this house, your relationship, and us four, even though you're mainly skint" 😅

You're a good role model for your children. A lot of children don't have that.

In saying all this, we don't have this nonsense in Scotland as we don't have this two tier system. All of our schools are the same unless you want to pay for the education they would get anyway at a state school (i.e. dafties)

Our local grammar schools have siblings priority but the child still has to pass the exam. In the OPs scenario it would be category 3 for siblings, being category 4 wouldn't help. I think ours has in catchment siblings separately from non catchment siblings, or at least it used to, to catch those who move in to the get place for DC1 then move away.

Hardly any children in care or Pupil Premium children get into grammar schools sadly. There’s certainly not a whole year group of them ahead of your daughter. It sounds like she may be disadvantaged by distance though.

If there was a fourth category of siblings, then your daughter would still probably be in the same position, as those who lived closer to the school than you would gain a place first irrespective of siblings.

The vast majority of the country doesn't have grammar schools, I sometimes think people living in grammar school areas can get a bit obsessed by it. I suppose you could always move areas. The pupil premium thing is a strange one, as obviously someone could lose their job and be unemployed, if only for a few weeks, and be able to claim pp for the following six years, even if they got a highly paid job straight afterwards. There has to be some way of measuring these things though, and none of them will be perfect.

You’re so worried that your DD won’t get in based on just 3 criterion, that you want to add a fourth? Funnily enough, one that would benefit YOU!!

If there aren’t enough spaces that you’re moaning even before you know if she’s in or not, how would limiting those spaces further make it “fair”?

Sibling policy are very common in non-selective school and very rare for selective schools.

A lot of the grammar schools near me don’t use distance at all and go down the marks. Some might have priority catchment zones.

An example I looked up (I was bored) set a pass mark
1 LAC and PP that have passed
2 highest scores working down to fill up 75%
3 some ratio from zone 1
4 zone 2
5 outside of catchment zones

I struggle to see how sibling policy is fair in any situation, other than the OP because she was counting on it to get her second daughter in.

What if siblings are different genders you cant hand down uniforms. Children at senior school should be able to make their own way to school aswell. I think youre clutching at straws with the uniform and ease of transport. Your child shouldnt have priority just because they have a sibling in the school. People could get 1 child in then move house and still send more and more children

So what you are saying is before distance your DD should be rewarded because her sibling is there?

no every child gets in on own merit

donthe scores get put in a list

What makes a school a bad or sink school?

Could it be the badly behaved students with disinterested parents. Children who come to school having had to get themselves ready. The fact they are short of permanent teachers as none stay long because of bad behaviour.

Why do you think your daughter should have priority because of her sibling than those that live closer?

Same - sibling policies are really common around hear and I don’t see why everyone on this thread has such an issue with it? Can anyone explain?

👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼

How does it ease pressure on travel costs. Train tickets aren't a 'buy 1 get 1 free' kind of thing.

You have not managed to make any case for why your daughter should get a place as a priority. You talk about 'working families should get a good school place' - we are a working family, and if my daughter lost out on a place to yours based on sibling priority, how would that be in any way fair?

You have presumably paid for tutoring for your girls for the 11+ to some extent? If yes, you have to see that they are already privileged to have parent who take an active interest in their education - that, more than any other thing, contributes to their success. A hard working bright child with engaged parents will do well anywhere.

Ultimately, if you don't like a schools policies and priorities, then you have the choice not to send your child there.

@LookingforMaryPoppins which area are you in?
I can't work out if you are in a super selective area or an area with a minimum qualifying score.
I haven't heard of any school without a sibling policy unless it's a super selective (but even a few of them have sibling policies).

Still insisting on using the word "normal". Awful.

Your poor children.