home education has meant our child is not able to access secondary school

What high school is it? Just curious as that's some massive WL!!!

You might as well put her into primary for four weeks. She might enjoy the experience.

There is a small chance that she will get a place as lists do change rapidly in the next three months. It sounds like you are trying for an exceptionally popular school if you are now 18th on the list.

Bit misleading in your title OP.

You have been offered a school and that is what the council has to do for you. It is good that the primary can take her.

The reason for the admission criteria (which is not illegal) is that otherwise many places would be taken by kids outside the LEA who would get in on distance above Manchester kids.

Sure, maybe, and it sounds like that is her preferred way forward right now but given that the school is full and she's inclined to carry on HE for a while longer, she may as well explore other ways of helping her daughter to find friends while she waits for a school place to come up.

School certainly does have the advantage of giving easy access to large numbers of kids, that's true. That doesn't equate to finding friends easily, however. Not all kids at school have friends. An adult living in London may have more trouble finding friends than one living in a village.

And there are some real advantages to socialising outside of school. Kids can make friends with others of various ages: my older dd's closest friends range from nine to seventeen. That range provides many different types of relationships, which lack the constant competitive edge of same-age social groups. They can seek out people who share their interests and choose to spend time with them, rather than having to sit next to the person whose name is next alphabetically (or however the teacher arranges the classroom). They have more time to be with their friends, as they aren't subject to a timetable which gives them 40 minutes to have lunch together and decrees that they only get to do English with their friend and nothing else - instead they can spend a whole morning on band practice, or painting, or building robots together. They can dip into many different groups rather than one fixed set of kids, so there is no fear of ostracism, which means less social jockeying and therefore less meanness. They can get some space from people who annoy them.

So it may be worth the effort of seeking out other home educated kids in the area. It can be done as a one-off: we did it when my older dd was seven and there has been no additional investment since, as it snowballs of its own accord.

Saracen. Your comments about your 14 year old and the problems of making friends really suggests that school may be best. You don't have to make that much effort to find friends. No-one needs digging out. The OP is probably right that her own DD needs a school.

OP, as it seems you may be home educating for a while longer anyway, perhaps it would be sensible also to look at ways you can improve your daughter's social life without school.

It's possible that in your area there is a sharp decline in home educated kids at secondary transition age. I don't think that is a typical pattern, however. Perhaps it just appears that way because you don't know the older kids? Some HE kids like a change and go off to school at secondary age, but by the same token some schooled kids who were happy at primary school find that secondary isn't right for them, and leave. My LA, like yours, has a significant HE population. Here, the LA's statistics indicate that nearly twice as many children are being HE in each year of secondary as primary!

Several years ago a well-connected long-time HE mum in my area asserted confidently that there were very few home educated teens around. But once people started asking questions, networking, and setting up the types of events likely to appeal to older kids, it became clear that she was completely mistaken. They appeared in their droves.

A friend of mine once observed that while you would expect kids to need less help connecting with their peers at secondary age, they actually seem to need more help. Adolescents become more particular about the company they keep and the activities they do. They become a bit more self-conscious. Yesterday I chucked my seven-year-old into the park with a handful of similar-aged kids who've just started home education, and they almost immediately began to play together. A few days earlier I had deposited her 14-year-old sister onto a sailing ship to spend a week with a dozen teens she'd never met. She's a very confident kid, but still she had worried: they all know each other, what if they don't like me, what if I say the wrong thing? As I drove off an hour later she was sitting nervously, not yet talking much.

What's more, some older kids have their own circles of friends and organise things for themselves. While they are perfectly friendly and willing to include any newcomers who happen to find them, they don't make much attempt to seek out and welcome new kids. You won't see their get-togethers posted to the HE list - they just invite their pals by Facebook. I am always nagging my dd to make more of an effort to accommodate new kids in the way that we adults do. It can take some perseverance to make a few friends and start learning about all that is happening.

My point is that perhaps there really are throngs of similar-aged kids in your area, but you might need to do some digging to find them. You could set up a group centred around your dd's interests and see if you can attract anyone that way: book club, maybe? Or encourage her to try some after-school clubs she might like. Take her to Hesfes if she'd enjoy that. I'm sure she can broaden her social circle considerably even without going to school.

Sorry phone playing up - that meant to say that Stockport have defined feeder schools and each High school has a mixture of demographics. I am not sure that one school alone can 'pick' it's feeders???

In Manchester it would be unusual for a child to go 4 miles unless you really wanted e.g. single sex school. The population density means most go to school within a mile or 2.

Is there something wrong with the single sex school 4 miles away?

I only ask because I went to a catholic primary and my catholic secondary school was 3.8 mile away and only accessible by taking two buses which I and hundreds of other children did.

I did get a free bus pass back then as it was over 3 miles away so there was no financial hardship for my parents (my two sisters also attended)

Could you not accept that place and then do an in-year transfer to the school you want?

Oh and the 'middle class selection' via feeder schools does not apply as all of Manchester LEA is very mixed. They have defined feeder schools and each High school has a mixture of demographics. I am
Not sure that one school alone can 'pick' it's feeders???

I think Cecily is right. Manchester LEA is small in area and long & narrow in geography. There are only 23 high schools and some like Parrswood are literally on the border with another LEA. It is over subscribed. If distance alone was used lots of Stockport children would 'win' on distance eligibility and lots of Manchester children end up with a school miles away. Chorlton High would be similar as very close to Trafford LEA etc etc. I suspect the priority list was done to address this is days when competition for e.g. Parrswood was bonkers. It's less silly now as Stockport schools have improved and most are good if not outstanding. I think HEd was prob not considered?

It would seem that the Manchester policy might work for the majority as this discussion has not been inundated with disgruntled parents. Most admissions policies favour some children above others, either by identifying feeder schools, catchment areas, exam criteria, social or educational need or faith. Some people fall between all these policies but it is extraordinarily difficult to please all of the people, all if the time. Manchester LA seems to use the policy "you have to be in it to win it". Reading the rules is important for everyone but given there is no history of challenge, we must assume it is legally watertight.

I am skeptical about the use of feeder schools in secondary admissions, it seems to consolidate 'good' schools limiting their catchment to 'good' pupils from equally 'good' primaries, shutting everyone else out

Actually it can be used for exactly the opposite reasons. Where I live, the primaries are small with most having 1 or 2 form entry. That means they rarely get a balance of children from different social classes as distance is a key element in admissions.

By carefully drawing up the catchment areas of feeder schools, all the secondaries have a good balance of wealthy and poor areas. The only exception is the whole area is one which has a faith element and thus recruits mainly mc parents who can play the game.

OP I would definitely recommend trying to get into a feeder primary if you can, it will help with making friends in advance of moving up as well as hopefully helping your position on the list.
Otherwise if you are happy to continue homeschooling for all or some of year 7, once you are applying in-year for a place in our area the feeder-school rules disappear so you may have more luck then.

For me, I can't really see why you don't just do straight distance as category 4.

I think, in this case, it could be to do with the shape of the Manchester City Council area which is very long and narrow, so many people from other LAs in Greater Manchester would have priority over people who live in Manchester itself if they did not have this policy. I doubt if home ed people were even considered in this.

I think its class warfare. Some people hate children who attend private schools and want to prevent them attending a vaguely popular school as a way of revenge. What they don't realise is that other children get caught in the crossfire of their class hatred/ politics.

If I was the OP I would put my daughter in a manchester primary and see what happens with the list of continous interest. Sometimes you have to be prepared to play the system.

I am skeptical about the use of feeder schools in secondary admissions, it seems to consolidate 'good' schools limiting their catchment to 'good' pupils from equally 'good' primaries, shutting everyone else out.

We got into our senior school on distance although out of catchment, it's in a new area where housebuilding has stalled so there are more places available than kids in catchment. A lot of people got places that would otherwise have been stuck with some pretty dire options. Now, though, they have started a feeder school system, taking on several outstanding primaries out of their catchment rather than the distance option they had before, this means they are only taking from outstanding primaries, in and out of catchment, and no-one else has a chance. I can't see how this does anything but restrict the school's intake to some very easy-to-teach kids from affluent areas, I'm sure their results will improve (they are good already) but it wont be from their teaching....

Sorry! Just meant to add that this is really about insufficient places at the popular schools and how they are rationed. I think you could argue that going to a local school, or feeder school, (and do we know if the preferred school has named its feeder schools?), means you have engaged with the educational provision in the area. It is really a case of Manchester wanting parents to opt in and then get an improved admission position. Is it any different to opting in by passing an 11+ exam which gives an exclusive right to a place at a grammar school? I just think planning is key in all educational situations and this is no different.

Yes. She did have the choice to read the policy and send her child to school for a bit. She appears to have done neither but other parents have. The OP seems peeved that her DDs local roots do not trump other applicants. If this is not the case, then why mention it. As so many are on the waiting list, it is reasonable to assume they are local and peeved too!

Mighty what doesn't sound right? If OP is in Dids or Chorlton then the schools (RC and non faith) are prob full of kids from Manchester primaries as they are over subscribed. I don't disagree that the schools with places are not the best, but the LEA have applied their own published policy and will argue that OP has a choice.

I am a little surprised at the Adjudicator's decision. However, as Tiggytape says, the objector did not raise the question of feeder schools. If someone were to take this to judicial review based on the Greenwich judgement I think there is an arguable case, although that doesn't necessarily mean it would succeed.

The other way to get this changed, of course, is to kick up a fuss with local councillors. If enough people complain they may do something about it.