Primary school admissions - MNHQ needs your thoughts!

I'd never heard anyone, ever, bring up the summerborn thing - I didn't even know it WAS a thing - and that might be because the primary school that my DC went to was both out of my borough (see all my previous posts re not being able to get him into anything local because wrong faith) and it was a school of last resort, the kind your kid goes to when your elbows simply aren't sharp enough to get them anywhere else. (Not that there was anywhere else to get them into, unless I went private or moved house, neither of which was possible.)

And as it happens, it turned out to be a lovely school, one I'd recommend to anyone. The demographic was very low-income (70% FSM), and most other parents were as blunt-elbowed as me. None of us knew that deferral was a possibility, but I don't think it would have been taken up anyway. A lot of the kids needed all the schooling they could get, reception was very play-based, and it was a warm and active place which the children loved. (And there was a spread of children with birthdays all through the year. I think the eldest had an October birthday.) I don't think any of the children would have benefited from deferral, and I don't think any were disadvantaged (quite the opposite) from them all starting before they turned 5.

If you want to campaign on summerborns, that's entirely your perogative, but be aware that many of us think it's a non-issue.

When we were looking for a new house we ruled out huge areas as the closest schools were faith schools and thus there was no point living there as our child would have been disadvantaged in the admissions round. I also would be happy to see an end to faith based admissions processes.

In terms of the summer born campaigners, and where there aren't significant developmental delays, I also agree with petalunicorn that a lot of it comes across as I just don't want my child to be the youngest in the class. Maybe that's not your intention but that's how it reads. I don't see a problem with deferrals where there are developmental delays, as opposed to some kids just being younger than some other kids in the class.

Some of the posts read as if the August born kids will be in a class full of September born kids ,instead of a class with a spread of birthdays throughout the year., the vast majority of whom will have started before their CSA. In my DC's class there are no kids with September birthdays and in fact the vast majority of kids are summer born. it's a single form entry so that's just the way it turned out.

I'm the mother of an (earlier) summer born child who would not want my DC in a class with kids that are up to 15 months older. I would rather that reception is kept as play based as possible and there was a much gentler easing into more formal learning in Year 1.

So if summerborn campaigners come on here regularly and start a thread about the issue then that will make the issue a 'mumsnetter' concern and will therefore be legitimate?

The issue is real, and of concern to thousands of parents regardless of how many times it is mentioned in threads. And surely the clues in the title, the OP asked for people's opinions on the admissions and one major flaw in the code has been rightly raised.

Im more concerned that certain authorities are now funding their staff to dissect threads like this, enjoy the flurry of summerborn applications!

From viewing the comments on this thread, it appears that their are some very divisive issues, but why is this? At the end of the day, we are all trying to do the best we can by our children, but it's not always possible it seems.. that's not necessarily the fault of parents. It's a fault of the admissions systems in place. There are thousands of different admission authorities, and multiple admission arrangements which parents have to negotiate. It's often complicated and confusing, even though it should not be. The process should be clear, fair and objective, and admission authorities should comply with legislation in place. But it's not and not all do, otherwise there would be no need for parents to refer objections to the Office of the Schools Adjudicator.

Lack of school places, no surplus in the system no doubt have an effect on this - that's not our fault. The outgoing government may blame the previous government and so on and so forth for this... the next government though absolutely cannot deny that there is a problem here, and they will need to address it.
(And what doesn't help is the DfE and admission authorities advising parents to apply for a school place in the year they do not want)

I've eaten a whole Easter egg whilst posting my comments on here tonight without even noticing.

That, added to my school admission stress has tipped me over the edge.

Haven't read all but ArcheryAnnie - that sucks! I am a Christian (and active in my church) and my DS has got into a brilliant school as a result, so I am one that's benefitted from that criterium.... however, people living in the parish (irrespective of faith) are prioritised over families of faith that are outside it, and that might be a way to ensure bizarre situations like yours don't arise.

I think the siblings/ moving rule is a good one, as certainly with rented/ temporarily living with grandma etc situations, there do seem to be many people willing to go that far for a foot in the door of a good school.

Obviously people saw that the summerborn issue was picked up on this thread and have continued the conversation.

With regards to using CSA for compulsory school age, it's a long word to type right?! If someone has spotted it being shortened then why wouldn't you use it?

Maybe there's some new concerns about admissions this time round, the summerborn issue has featured heavily in national newspapers and television recently; more people are aware than ever before. Its a hot topic.

I am also desperate to get into a vaguely decent, local school with as little stress as possible and I wanted to highlight to MNHQ how much more stress I have had to face through the admissions process having a summerborn. As previously stated, I could only indicate ONE preference, ONE!! What if that school is oversubscribed, where does that leave me? We are at a huge disadvantage.

See previous posts.

What 'privelege' does it take to take advantage of a 'deferral'? If the DfE and admissions authorities actually made families aware that they could even do this AND made the request straightforward I know many more families would be requesting it. If families feel that's not right for their child and their whole family unit then that's their choice to make.

We just want the choice.

The point is...what is the point in having a compulsory school age in England if a child can't begin school, at compulsory school age, in reception? That is the question here.

So are you actually saying that we shouldn't have a public policy that allows parents to do their best for their child...I think you are aren't you?! I think that's exactly the reason we should make it public policy.

Then it's parents choice if they choose to take it or not.

There has definately been more people than normal on a primary ed thread posting about summer borns as I said previously - I am not sure that was what the original question was about ..

Masses mentioning summer born? There are currently 517 messages on this thread, the vast majority of which seem to pertain to faith schools.

Faith schools, a thought - As admission authorities for schools designated as having a religious character must have regard to any guidance from the body or person representing their religion and as CofE schools must consult with their diocese about proposed admission arrangements, it's only fair that any guidance is publicly available on a schools website along with determined admission arrangements, since "Admission arrangements means the overall procedure, practices, criteria and supplementary information to be used in deciding on the allocation of school places and refers to any device or means used to determine whether a school place is to be offered." - more often than not, it is not available. Yet some parents of summer born children have been told 'the diocese says no', or 'the diocese won't allow it'. No transparency.

And honestly, I think some sort of alert probably went out on your Facebook group or something as a way to promote your cause. That is fine, but it isn't subtle and expect people to call you on trying to make this seem 'THE admissions issue' MNHQ should promote when it doesn't feature much generally.

Spring I agree on okay based. Our massive school is totally play based in reception which is probably why it gets amazing results for its area. No home work. The odd book home I am horrified BH stories of R DC with homework
I a

No. Lots of people have pointed out again and again the amount of privilege it takes to take advantage of even 'easy' deferral. Also, how misleading it is to talk as if most children start at 5 and do a full year in reception. I get that you want to help other summer babies, but fundamentally no, it isn't about helping everyone. It is about parents doing the best for their child. Which is legitimate, but not a reason to make public policy.

PenguinsandtheTantrumof Doom

Sorry, I didn't realise there was a 'popular style' of name we had to conform to? I saw this post and genuinely wanted to comment as it is something I am very passionate about and CURRENTLY experiencing within the admissions process, many other summerborn parents obviously are too.

I'm not really sure what the problem is? It's a genuine admissions problem.

I think MNHQ would be very happy that this thread has drawn a lot of interest from (possibly) new MNers. If anything that's a good thing and I think it should be welcomed.

Everything you have just said has been responded to by someone previously, so I won't repeat.

I'm not sure if it has to be honest...how do we only care about our own children when I've just posted this....

With regards to only 'caring about our own child' you couldn't be further from the truth. If we had automatic right to do this, there would be fewer children in the class with SEN, fewer behavioural issues etc., all of which could have a positive impact on ALL children in the class. The teacher wouldn't be spending as much time dealing with children who are struggling and unable to access the curriculum - more children 'ready' for the curriculum and better outcomes for everyone!!

This would benefit ALL children...would it not?!

Addressing the OP:

1. Priority for siblings should only apply to siblings living within catchment. Oath wise, you get too much gamesmanship in urban areas like London.

1. Churches running schools is fine. Allocating places based on religion is not.

1. Allowing parents to "hold a child back" a year before starting reception has a lot of negative potential consequences. This is allowed in most American states and the result is a spread of age difference up to two years instead of just one. Down the line it makes classroom management difficult. It also disadvantages poorer children; they become the youngest in a classroom because their parents need the "free childcare " that is school and cannot choose to hold them back the way middle class parents can.

The way too protect summer born children is to keep Reception play based for all the children. They don't need Biff and Chip books shoved in their tiny hands.

MMelson - no. I am saying that when masses of people join to promote their issue it distorts perception of how important MNers as a whole find that issue.

PenguinsandtheTantrumofDoom - So what your saying is that there are no new (whether that be brand new, or a name change) MNers allowed? Or perhaps that there should be some sort of introductory period before anyone is allowed to post? When does one become a MNer in your view then, genuine question?

One of the main reasons people have commented on the thread going off topic is that MNHQ asked for the views of MNers. A large number of summer born posts are by people who have never previously posted on MN with that name. And regular MNers who name change tend to choose names in keeping with styles popular on the site.

Everything you have just said has been responded to by someone previously, so I won't repeat.

Ilove that is such a valid point. Our school has high percentage of working parents so we have full wrap round care - as do all our local schools. (10). I have no idea what we would have done without it

petalunicorn
PenguinsandtheTantrumofDoom

MNHQ have asked for thoughts on the current systems for allocating primary places, What WE think about how our LA allocates places? and Have WE found the process stressful?

I'm presuming MNHQ wants thoughts from everyone on this issue...?

The allocation of places for summerborn parents is an extremely stressful process; more stressful than it already is for parents applying for a 'chronological' year group place. We not only have all the issues you face with admissions but also have an added double whammy...

We face a 'battle' with admission authorities to even request a reception start. We have to submit evidence. We can't even apply online.

Some parents can't even list three preferences as some schools won't allow a reception start at compulsory school age so that leaves us at a disadvantage. I could only list ONE school.

After all that, even if we are 'successful' our applications are considered alongside all others and we face all the same challenges everyone else faces too.

This thread has not gone 'off tangent' as previously quoted. It is a real issue, an admissions issue that IS effecting thousands of families. And if I'm right in thinking that's what MNHQ asked for opinions on!!

With regards to only 'caring about our own child' you couldn't be further from the truth. If we had automatic right to do this, there would be fewer children in the class with SEN, fewer behavioural issues etc., all of which could have a positive impact on ALL children in the class. The teacher wouldn't be spending as much time dealing with children who are struggling and unable to access the curriculum - more children 'ready' for the curriculum and better outcomes for everyone!!

In addition to all of the worries from previous posters, I find it mind boggling that the availability of wrap around care is such a lottery. We have chosen three schools which are not in catchment area because the two that are have no breakfast or after school provision. I am happy to pay - it needs to be an option though!

Actually, it's okay I'll just give up work so that I can drop DD off and pick her up every day (said no one ever.)

Have not read all the posts but agree with all of the points JassyRadlett makes. Seven of the ten nearest state primary schools to me are faith schools. They have considerably less FSM and EFL pupils than the community schools. It also means that despite living in a very multicultural part of london the diversity in the local schools in no way reflects the local area.