Schools admission criteria......

How would your dd having sibling priority be giving all children a fair opportunity.

@LookingforMaryPoppins . No. You used the term "dragging down".
We were just clarifying that your children are not being "dragged down" by disadvantaged children. You have referred to some sort of mythical privilege in many of your posts, which does not exist for these children at the expense of yours.

And jon recruitment asking about parental income/jobs.

I regret being vaguely sympathetic and supportive in my previous response. No children in care aren’t “dragging down” your children. You’ve not heard a thing that anyone on the thread says and you just want to stamp down on the most disadvantaged children to get a boost for yours m because you think you are entitled because you are “normal” and “hardworking”. Utterly disgraceful.

I have one that’s in a standard secondary school and one that took the 11 plus. Both very different, with different hobbies and interests.
My eldest wouldn’t have been able to pass the 11 plus at the age he would have had to take it as left primary school slightly below where he should have been academically. He has since caught up and is now in the top sets for everything.
I think having looked into it, you are totally correct it does seem to be fairly common that children are in different schools. I know of 3 families where one child is in a grammar, the other child is in a standard secondary.

You're right. They never inflate the prices to pay for other children, as you say.
I don't know where the OP has got that misinformation from.

Schools do not inflate trip prices (at least mine doesn’t) to subsidise PP children. Schools get additional funding for these children which can then be used for these experiences.

Absolutely this! We are paying about 3k for 11+ tutoring this year - and recognise our privilege (and our daughters) in having the ability to make the choice to do this.

If a child on PP gets through, with no tutoring, then objectively I feel they deserve the place more than my daughter. Of course I would be disappointed for her, but I wouldn't in any way feel it was unfair. I would think 'good on them'. DD has friends who are very bright, but no chance of them getting tutoring for a variety of reasons,and I'm frustrated on their behalf that they won't get the same opportunities that she does, they definitely deserve it as much as she does. It's a flawed system!

😂😂

I know.

I bet Mary Poppins isn’t looking for her.

@LookingforMaryPoppins How are standards being dragged down when - in your school’s case - all those being admitted have passed the 11+

Dear god, it just keeps getting worse.

So now the children in care are dragging others down. You do realise that the children in care that manage to pass the grammar exams shall naturally have the underlying ability and not had tutoring to pass. Therefore how are they dragging down the standards? What you mean is your elitist and do not like the idea of those pesky children in care or from lower socioeconomic backgrounds having an underlying academic ability.

Who is being "dragged down"?
Let me tell you, if a child gets a free revision guide or her English trip gets paid for, that is from the PP fund and no-one is being "dragged down".
I think you need to read and take on board comments on this.

But that’s not what your posts are about. Read them. Where do you say this?

Yes but having a sibling rule for a selective grammar is the opposite of that

the so called sink school should be improved

How is trying to level the playing field for a few very disadvantaged children dragging everyone down? How?

No there isn’t a bigger picture.

if the school is in an area of high deprivation it should be taking more PP/LAC. National PP is 28% - you’re saying high deprivation but they’re only taking 16% PP. They aren’t prioritising places for these pupils in an unfair way - they aren’t even reflecting their demographic (and yet parents like you think your children should be getting the train into the school and taking places off local children).

School trips can only charge the cost per pupil so subsiding is against the school funding agreement. What may be happening is the school is using PP grant to cover the cost of educational visits for pupils on PP which is a research proven good use of the grant.

if you give me the name of the school I can check both their proportion of PP/LAC and how they use their PPgrant.

Very few secondaries and even fewer grammars have the sibling priority any more and it is very obvious why this is the case for grammars. Parents make these decisions re uniform and transport when they choose schools.

You are right - we should be creating an educational system that delivers excellence for all. BUT THIS IS NOT WHAT YOUR POSTS ARE ABOUT. You complained that PP and LAC children got priority over privileged children, that non grammar schools were sink schools , that PP families were lazy and not normal.

You do not care about the education system - you only care about giving your children the advantage you feel they deserve over groups of children who, across the country, underachieve and do not receive the best chances.

And that’s fine but then don’t expect the education system and tax payer to fund what you think your children deserve over others. You need to do this by living in a different catchment where the schools aren’t ‘sink schools’ or pay private if you don’t think state schools can offer a quality education.

And please read the room. We live in a society (reflected here) who wants to offer the most vulnerable children in our society the chance of an excellent education because we know how important it is to these children. Maybe take a moment to reflect if this is what you want your children to grow up hearing.

No need for sibling priority then if they'd all get in on their own merits. Although
I went to a grammar school and can think of a few families with one at grammar and one at secondary modern. It wasn't uncommon at all.

I can PM you the area if you’d like. I share way too much to put it on the thread.

I was also thinking this - it's unfair to offer to them, and then they struggle to keep up. As well as being unfair on those who got much higher scores than them. The whole thing is a bit rubbish really. And I don't agree with it. But my DD1 wants it, so we put our morals aside...

I think they are a terrible idea. Neither DH or I grew up in a grammer area, and we moved to Bucks when our girls were 1 and 3, it didn't even occur to us to look at secondaries at that point. The first we really knew about it were when DD1's friends older siblings were prepping for the 11+, and by then we were really settled. Now DD1 is year 5 and going through the stress of prepping for 11+ - her choice after looking round secondaries both comp and grammer. The difference is so big and she has her heart set on a specific grammar school, so we will do our best to support her to get there as its something she wants. I'm happy wherever she goes - I went to a 'sink school' and got top grades, so it's really not us driving it. However, a part of me is watching her go through all the stress and extra work and wishing it wasn't even an option for her to have to consider at the age of 9, it's so much pressure at such a young age!

Bloody hell. She'll faint.
Or the trips we run (for free!) to take PP students on open days to RG universities.