To ask what your thoughts are on siblings getting priority at over-subscribed schools?

[goingeversoslowlymad]

So the letters have gone out advising parents which school they have gained a place for their 4/5 yr old for September. As happens every year as dc1's school is badly over subscribed, there have been people who have lost out.

The school admission criteria gives priority to children who already have siblings in the school, after they have been admitted it then goes down to catchment area and distance from the school. Is this the norm most places? There was quite a lot of bad feeling today when I was at the park. A few of the mums were really angry and saying that the school is discriminating against first-born and only children as it is making it impossible to get a place. I felt a bit guilty as DC2 was one of those who got a place.

I can really see their argument and really do feel for them but what is the solution? I would not physically be able to get my children to 2 different schools in the mornings. Sorry if this has been done before but would just love to know if there is a fairer solution.

TBH i think it would be easier if they just took away the ofstead reports, still inspect but change the way they do it somehow, mines changed ratings 3 times since i have been there and not a lot has changed. You see it as i have 4 schools, everyone wants the outstanding school, next report one gets upgraded or downgraded and theres a swing again. Instead of all the money for taxi's appeals etc and put it into the struggling school. My school takes from the private estate, my catchment from 2 council estates and out of the 2 schools the catchment is far better, a well run high achieveing school all down to a change in head teacher and teacher's

The system we have now is ridiculous imo, its based on parents trying to get the best ofstead rated schools, yeah one year you can be at an outstanding school, something change and the next report your at a satisfactory school. Plough the money into making all schools good and people will just go to their local school

oops ignore typos im on my phone

Our school is a church school so it goes

Looked after
Sibling
Church attendances
Distance.

Another church school in our area
Looked after
Church
Sibling
Distance

The second has caused no end of trouble as in one year a non christain place is allocated then sibling applies in an oversubscribed year and they don't get a place. That to me is crazy siblings should 100% be priority.
We moved after dd1 had started and before dd2 started (still only 10 minute walk) and one street further away from old house. To think that would mean my dd2 wouldn't get a place is ridiculous as DD1 was very settled not everyone who moves does so through choice.

We are seeing a similar problem with out of catchment siblings at our local village school.

The priority goes ...

1. Public care/looked after/adopted
2. Siblings
3. Church
4. Distance

The upshot of this is that children who live spitting distance from the school (in one case, opposite the school gate) cannot get a place -- this includes onlys, fbs and subsequent children in families where fb did not get a place.

There is a hellova lot of upset about the situation because our village simply does not have 30 children per cohort per year, but because it is a "nice" school in a semi-rural area on a residential street, parents from other surrounding villages (that, incidentally, all have their own schools and none of them are dodgy) apply under the "regular" churchgoers priority (and we all know how that one goes) and get places, then all their siblings get places ... and a supposed village school ends up with no local children in it -- who then all end up in primaries three miles or more away.

I should add that my dd1 didn't get our first choice school there were 22 siblings therefore only 8 spaces and we lived 1.1 miles away. However I never gave it a minutes thought that siblings who lived further away got in. I struggle to get my dds to school and then onto work as it is no idea how I would juggle 2 schools.

I am absolutely amazed reading this. I live in the UK in a small rural community & this isn't an issue. You go to the nearest primary, then all local primaries feed into the local secondary. Job done.

If the school are being shit lots of parents complain & it is sorted out pretty quickly, the school improves. Grumpy parents on the doorstep (who you have to face in the local shop) seems to get things done.

The rest of the UK seems to be totally different. Your local school is shit, don't moan & work to improve it. Spend a fortune renting a flat nearby so you can get a place at a different school.

Sorry if I have misunderstood, it just seems like a crazy system!

I've seen many MNers report that before- and after-school care places are like gold-dust.

I can't imagine the situation would be improved by adding parents-with-a-child-at-another-school-to-pick-up into the mix to complete for scarce places. Normally it isn't cheap, either, is it? Expensive enough when you're using it in order to enable you to work, never mind just picking up another child.

Totally understand your view Spin. I recently looked at taking on an extra PT job & just couldn't make it financially worthwhile after paying for childcare.

Kipper And sometimes, you decide your local schools will be much of a muchness, ignore OFSTED, apply to your 3 nearest schools in order of distance, like a sensible sort, and find loads of other people had children that year too. The bastards.

Although I suspect part of the problem is our second and third nearest schools may count as naice schools. The second nearest definitely does.

Where I live catchment children generally get priority over out of catchment siblings.

This stops people renting near the school to get DC1 in then siblings getting in by default but doesn't help where a family are forced to move out of catchment (although siblings still stand s good chance of getting in).

In the Sunday Times there was an article this week saying that there were going to be changes and siblings would be below distance in criteria. It had already started in some places.

What I don't understand is why having both dc at the same school is a big enough reason to give siblings priority in the first place, but physical problems with getting the dc to different schools does not count as a big enough problem to appeal on.

That's because you are looking at this from the parents' point of view, not the school.

The parents who have moved out of catchment but still want their younger child to attend are the sort of parents the school wants.

If you look at some of the faith schools 'catchment' can include pupils at faith schools in other towns before pupils living next door, even if they are the faith of the school.

In Times here

Sibling priority is also in the interest of the schools.

They get to know families and build strong relationships in the school community. Parents are more likely to volunteer for (eg) fundraising or helping if they are involved with only one school. DC are less stressed because they aren't dragged on a double/triple school run before school.

So they think that parents should struggle to get their children to two separate schools, so their pfb can get into a 'better' school? Entitlement at it's finest! It's been that way since I was at primary school 20 years ago, they need to suck it up and realise that their child is no more special than any other in anyone's eyes apart from their own!

And unless parents are forced to go miles out from where they live as they didn't get in to one close enough to walk to with a 4 year old (which I do consider unfair, especially if they work and/or do not have their own transport) I find the whole 'school of choice' thing quite funny. Ofsted reports and exam results aren't the only indicators of a good school, if I child is going to succeed they will, regardless of the school based on their ability, their ambition and a bit of input from the parents, schools can't work miracles no matter what ofsted say. Even with universities, a degree is a degree no matter what one you went to more or less!

I had DCs in different primary schools.

1 walked to school on their own the other got driven to school.

It was a right faff though.

In my opinion siblings should only get a place if the older child will still be in the school at the time. Also if they have moved so a maximum of 3 miles away.

My Dd goes to a faith school. We are the wrong faith and she didn't get a place until December. Siblings living 50 miles away in one case got in over people living very local.

I live rurally and property goes to children in the village and the next one along, then siblings out of catchment (the nearest town is only 5 minute drive away) then all others.

While a couple of my friends had a scared moment waiting to see if their DC2 would get in from the town, it's the fairest way for those who actually live near the school.

sashh makes an excellent point.

The parents prepared to do a bit of trampling to get their Dc into the school of their choice, are the parents who will go OTT about everything from reading diaries, to cake baking and employing tutors. Exactly the parents the schools want.

I agree with the sibling rule as a single parent with 3 children who also works full time. I would struggle to actually work if my children were in different schools - I am a teacher and I have no flexibility in the time I need to be at work and very few schools to me locally do breakfast clubs (I am lucky, my children's school does) and even breakfast club starts quite late from a dropping off and moving on to another school and then to my own school perspective. I am not sure childminders would be able to help me - they too would need to be in two places at once (and all the childminders I've come across only school run to one school - I would be interested to hear from childminders on this issue). Potentially, not having a sibling rule will ensure that some families are forced to make very difficult decisions work-wise.

That sort of parent can just as equally be a pain! There are also those who relax and do nothing once their child is in.

I'm currently on the right side of the sibling priority rule, but our local authority have just changed it.

DS1 is currently in Y1 in a large village/small town school which was one of the few in the area not to be massively oversubscribed when we applied. The LA then changed the criteria to remove the sibling rule for anyone over a mile and a half from the school, although they've given a grace period for any child offered a place before that change kicked in, so DS2 will be OK.

The problem is that DS1's school and a couple of other schools serve outlying villages, of which we're one, so any rural-living family not with 3 children where the eldest will be out of the school before the youngest starts (i.e. 5 or 6 yr age gap - can't quite work it out this early!) will probably finish up with DCs 2 and 3 in different schools.

I sort of think it's fair in the long run, but I do think they should consider extending the grace period so that the criteria reads 'any child who has a sibling who was offered a place before Sep 2013 and who still has any sibling in attendance' rather than it having to be the same sibling who got the offer and is still in attendance. It would only involve a very few families and would stop a lot of angst.