to be utterly pissed off that having a child already at the school has no bearing on getting a place if you do not live in the catchment area?

[samram]

Ok, This news to me.

Having just rang the school admission line to make sure they had my dd4 application form i was told that already having my elder daughter attending the school has no bearing on my application if i do not live in the catchment area!
Im so worried now - i mean how can i possibly be in two places at once?
Its not even like my elder daughter is old enough to walk home on her own (she's 6 in a few weeks)

Does any know if this is correct or have any advice? Thanks

I'm afraid 'good schools' tend to be in affluent areas because the kids from those households boost results - it's no co-incidence! Compared to the schools in poorer areas where the children have many more barriers to reaching their potential. I've taught in inner-city schools and leafy suburb schools.

The contrast in the behaviour of the students, expectation of parents and support from parents is SHOCKING.

That is exactly why it is pointless going on and on about how it's so unfair that children from 'disadvantaged' families always end up in 'bad' schools. Soime people want to believe it's just about not being able to afford the right house in the right catchement area, and that middle class parent always buy their children advantage. They are missing the point totally.

AllDirections I agree with you 100%.

The reason we changed our mind about sending DD1 to the catchment school was that they have 3 reception classes of 30 kids. She would've been completely overwhelmed - you might say it's because she's my PFB - and you might be right to some extent.

The school we managed, by some fluke, to get her into has less than 90 in the whole school - and it took her long enough to settle in there, too.

DD2 would have no problem at all going to the big, catchment school - they are completely different, personality-wise - and in some ways the catchment school might suit her needs better - I don't know. But they are in completely opposite directions and getting them to school would be a nightmare.

thank you fellatioNelson for agreeing..harsh but it is true and that's life - it's hard to say it/accept it as it is sometimess!

Rough areas have rough schools because basically the intake is cough 'challenging' (generally speaking of course with risk of being flamed). I worked in a school where, I kid you not, more than half of the KS4 kids refused to take a bag with them, so no work went home and none came back. Not even a pen - they didn't care less, nor did their parents and their behaviour was a disgrace. As a result, the school had low standards as teachers basically just had to survive one day to the next.

maybe parents from crappy, deprived areas whose nearest catchment school is not great, failing whatever, should be granted a place at a 'good' non catchment school if they feel confident enough or ambitious enough to apply. Our school is considered a good school and is in the most expensive catchment area for the town - only a few parents from rougher areas nearby , (ok, the bad reputation council estate) actually applied and made the effort to go outside their area and travel rather than send them to the nearest school all their neighbours would automatically pick. They did this to get their children what they see as a better education and overall more pleasant learning experience. Why should some kids be stuck in a crappy school just because the parents can't afford the mortgage in a more expensive area.

Mine will go to different primary schools and it will be ok - theres such an age gap though that the older will start and finish at slightly different times though and I'll ask other mums to help out as I do with theirs. On my working days they will both be at after school club anyway and so I can pick them up when I want

'Good', bright and well behaved kids make schools 'good' on paper and a good environment to learn in and teach in.

'Bad', less bright and badly behaved kids make schools 'poor' on paper and create an appauling environment to learn in and teach in.

So if you want a 'good' school, you generally have to live in an area where the former is generally the norm. The atmosphere in the school can then be purposeful - the staff can teach to a high level and kids can learn.

BEGON, here here totally agree

Begon I agree with you to a certain extent, however who is to say which parent has made more effort and their child is more deserving of a place -

the parent that you have described "made the effort to go outside their area and travel rather than send them to the nearest school"

or the parent who has made the effort to look at housing outside their area and relocate rather than send them to the nearest school"

Very well put cameron.

Yep, Cameron.

Or the person who has taken on a large mortgage to live in a better area, and has not an ounce of spare cash, versus the person who lives in the cheaper area and can go on holidays, have a flash car etc etc. Why is the latter according to many on MN a morally superior person and thoroughly entitled to demand access to the school on the "right" side of the tracks?

WHAY HAVE YOU NOT PUT YOUR CHILD AT THE SCHOOL IN YOUR CATCHMENT AREA THEN YOU WOULD NOT HAVE THESE PROBLEMS?

My kids live on the wrong side of the tracks through no fault of their own and are entitled to a good education, Why should i send my kids to a poor school when theres a good one closer, not aimed at anyone just a point

lala because its shit

Fifi but then there's the argument of parents who have forked out more money for a house near the "good" school only to have it "trashed" by children who aren't interested in learning-shall we put it. Swallowedafly is right, would it still be good if the "wrong kind of people" got in?

This is why I won't state educate my ds. Stupid red tape.

DONT YOU THINK KIDS WILL LEARN WHEREVER THEY GO TO SCHOOL IF THEY ARE WILLING TO BE TAUGHT AND HAVE THE SUPPORT OF FAMILY . MY DAUGHTER GOES TO SCHOOL IN AN AREA WHERE EVERYONE THINKS IT IS THE BEST SCHOOL BECAUSE EVERYONE DRIVES A FLASHY CAR AND LIVES IN A BIG HOUSE. I HAVE EVEN HEARD MUMS SAYING THEY ARE PUTTING DOWN THE ADDRESS OF A HOUSE THEY RENT OUT JUST TO GO TO THIS SCHOOL . MY DAUGHTER HAS BEEN THERE 2 YEARS AND HAS COME HOME TELLING ME ALL KINDS OF STORIES ABOUT BAD BEHAVIUOR IN CLASS. WE LIVE IN A TERRACED HOUSE BOTH WORK DONT DRIVE A FLASHY CAR AND ARE SKINT AT THE END OF THE MONTH BUT OUR DAUGHTER IS IN ALL THE HIGHEST GROUPS AT SCHOOL.

gramercy..indeed - I know it was our choice to take on a big mortgage but that's what you have to do to avoid the OPs situation.

Living on catchment of a very good school does not come 'easy' (to many) and i hate it when people say 'it's ok for you, you can afford to live there', because you are quite right it means going without so much other stuff.

putting down a rented out address is breaking the law and severe trouble if caught

My daughters in the highest groups at school and lives on a council estate. I dont think for one minute if she went to the other school she would fulfill her potential.

Lady - so you are stateing that my kids are the wrong sort of kids as they live on a council estate, i can tell you the kids from the private estate are a lot more badly behaved than my kids thanks

What a load of rubbish. So if you live on a council estate you have to send your kids to a crap school because their the wrong sort of kids

Fifi- I didn't say that, I was referring to what Swallowedafly said...about a good school remaining "good".

Still I'm glad I'll be privately educating.

Fifi- I also had no idea you live in social housing...so that clearly wasn't implied.

swallowedAfly Wed 02-Mar-11 19:42:55
the other point is, and not a popular one i'm assuming, that if all the kids from the wrong side of the tracks (local to the not good school) got into the out of catchment 'good' school. would it still be a good school?

There's an interesting bit in Freakonomics along these lines.

Basically students could enter a ballot to go to schools they wouldn't normally get into. Those who entered the ballot and got into a 'better' school did well, however those who entered the ballot but didn't succeed in winning a place did just as well. The fact that a student or their parents were motivated enough to enter the ballot in the first place was the best indicator of future attainment.