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

swallowedafly - I think Northern was making the opposite point.

She was saying that under catchment first, a family who had one single child could move out of the area with impunity, and their child would retain their place at the school, at the expense (possibly) of a family who had NOT moved, but who could not get their younger child into the school because the catchment area had tightened.

Most people who choose to state educated their children bang on about how great the state education system is and how "it never did me any harm".

After today, everyone is crying that they haven't been accepted into particular schools.

If you can't be in two places at once, either move house or move your dd to the closer school.

"Most people who choose" Lady?

Most of us don't HAVE a choice. So sue people for wanting the best for their kids and being upset when that doesn't work out.

And here - have a bucketload of compassion - seems like you need some.

Yes tyv is right - or perhaps a family who have always lived out of catchment but got one child in and now can't get another in whilst another child retains a place that they might not now be entitled to all things being equal.
I certainly wouldn't want to see children evicted from a school but I think we need to recognise that 'in catchment' children don't stay as that - so why should siblings have to? Also as has been pointed out - catchment areas shift and out of catchment does not mean 'not local'. For the third time of saying it (I think) we live 15 minutes walk away from dds school - would anybody like to try telling me that isn't local?

On the private vs state thread on MN, most people tend to say "they can afford private schooling but think it is unnecessary so they choose state school".

I don't need compassion, I focus on my child and ensure I make the right decisions for him....relying on the Government to do this is a schoolboy error.

LOTM - that's just absurd - move house or disrupt your child's education versus giving a sibling a place at the same school? The former are hugely expensive, disruptive and not necessarily possible. The latter could be easily predicted and accommodated.

Isn't the second child 6?

Northern, well the OP will probably have to choose one of those...it's not about compassion and being "nicey nice" it's about being realistic.

Could DC1/2.. drop one of them off ?

Yes and it's not in my opinion 'realistic' to put siblings in different schools in the name of prioritising another child's right to attend that school because of an artifical boundary.

Come on - does anybody actually think having siblings at different schools (for primary) is a good idea?

Ok, so what are the Ops choices if the two I have highlighted are not realistic options?

Been watching this with interest as ds1 is not in a catchment school. Did not like the catchment school at all. Dont know what I'd do if ds2 didnt get in. :( Havent moved btw

I don't know what the op can do but she shouldn't be in this position because all her children should get a space at the same school.

yabu. My ds didn't get a place in our first and second choice primary school because of siblings who were no longer living in the catchment area. LA said we would have to send him to a school the other side side of the borough. We opted to send him to privater school instead.

My daughter is in a reception class of 31 (way too big)..which has 4 (that I know of) off-catchment 'successful appeal' children in it..really annoys me, sorry.

As I understand it, a child will only get in on appeal if the criteria have not been applied correctly. They will not get in just because a parent has thrown a hissy fit.

This is a peculiarly English (and Welsh or Irish?) problem. Our education system in Scotland is far from perfect, but it's more logical.

Primary schools have a catchment area. If you live in the area, you get a place. Even if that means they need to add another P1 class or go to composites.

The primary schools are feeders for a secondary, so, say, 6 primary schools feed into one secondary. The catchment for the secondary is automatically the same area as all the primary catchments.

This means that children go to the same secondary as their friends, but more importantly, they go to their local school, and most of them walk there.

If you want a primary or secondary that you're not in the catchment for, you put in a placing request.

I'm amazed when I read on here the distances that children have to travel to get to school, passing other local schools en route.

I'm getting stressed reading about it - I really feel for you all who are living it.

No these are hissy fit types who live just off catchment - all had an older C in school years ago (now in High sch),but wanted the same experience for their younger C, so kicked up a fuss.

it seems more strict in my area - schools can legally only take 30 and they NEVER go beyond that. Like soupdragon, appeals only get in if the criteria was wrongly applied - even if it was and the class was full, they still have to go on a waiting list if they are lower down in priority- wouldnt just go in as pupil 31!. My daughter is in a school out of the area and their criteria for my second daughter is:

kids in care
catholic kids in catchment area
catholic kids with siblings (doesnt stipulate if in area or not so they can't use area here as criteria is legally binding - not for school to choose)
other catholics
other religions

So the head said as long as 60 kids (2 classes) don't apply from area then we are okay. Every year kids from outside get in even without siblings/non catholics so i know we are above them and so probably fine but still a worry! The schools who take the kids get funding and so i kind of feel if they are happy to accept them as "bums on seats" when undersubscribed, they must commit to the whole family or not take them at all! see individual LEAs for intake criteria as they are legal and even schools who do their own admissions (like mine), they still have to use the criteria legally.

Don't get me started on the shite feeder system for secondary schools.