To get annoyed at "catchment area" school places

[Daiso]

Not even sure if the title makes sense however.....
I'd like DS to go to a school which is 2.5 miles away - there are 2 in that area, both with amazing OFSTED reports and great reviews from friends whose DC attend. Both of these outside my catchment area even though its really not that far.
The school just down the road is shocking, friends pulled DC out, not so great OFSTED etc etc.
I can't afford to move to the area where the better schools are as the house prices are astronomical. Just no chance whatsoever of being near.
AIBU to think it's unfair that I won't be able to send DS to that school as I can't afford to live in the area?
I think that everyone should be given a chance to send their DC to a school of their choosing -maybe by first come first served putting name down or by pre school attended (DS will be going to the pre school in the grounds of school I'd like but that makes no difference)

These schools are expensive to rent near and expensive to buy near- that is a fact!

I don't like the insinuation that sometimes comes through on these threads that children who come from middle class families are somehow less deserving of a high quality state education than their less well off peers are.

Just to say that income and class aren't always linked.

YABU - distance from the school after any "special cases" (looked after children, special needs etc) have been given priority is the only fair way to decide who is given places.
I do think there should be a caveat to the sibling rule so it only applies if the family still live in the catchment area - it is unfair that someone can rent a house for 6 months to get a place then move away and still get all the sibs into the favoured school.
It is a bit of a self perpetuating cycle - the parents who can (are affluent enough and concerned enough about education) choose to live the catchment area of the good school, which means the intake of that school is more likely to be bright, well supported kids with fewer social problems. This pushes house prices up and up close to good schools.
We live in the nicest bit of a fairly poor area, we are the top few percent of families at my son's school in terms of income/education levels, and there are a lots of FSM, EAL, looked after, statemented and special needs kids in the school. My husband has been a governor at the school since before we had kids and is now head of governors, and in that time the school has improved from being in special measures to being 'good'. It has been brilliant so far for our son. It's reputation locally is still crap and friends are amazed we chose to send our son there (we would also be catchment for the nice white middle class school round the corner) but they crucially have not been and seen what is going on at the school now and they don't know that teachers from our school are mentoring teachers at the 'good school' who were slated by OfSTed for coasting

It is unfair that state schools vary so much and that some are failing. Your suggested system is even less fair, but would benefit you personally. It is in your interests to get involved at your local school, join the governors or the PTA and make it better for your own child and your local area.

I live in a city. The idea of 4 year olds being bussed from one side of the city to another due to a lottery system of school places is horrific. Where possible children should be walking to school.

It is not always as simple as choosing your local school. In my case the local school is Catholic and my DP is Jewish, besides it is one of the best schools in the county and for those reasons it is not an option. The next two nearest schools, 900 metres and 870 metres are 'outstanding' and they both have waiting lists. My DS goes to a school that is 'outstanding' but it is nearly 1.7 miles away. There is no option to move him to a 'local' school, I am in a black hole for school allocation.

Many years ago when I was at comp, it wasn't 'the' school to be at - it was the rough one. In the 5th form we had a go at one of the teachers debated about it and how we were the 'thick' ones with poor results compared to the other school. The teacher then told us that our school policy was to enter every pupil for an English qualification (or General Studies) and a maths qualification as they believed every pupil deserved a chance of these 2 core exams. The 'good' school picked who was allowed to take the exams, if you wanted to do them but weren't picked you had to pay for it yourself and got refunded if you passed. At that point we all had a lot more respect for our school and considered the other school crap.
So not everything is as it reads on the results tables......

Just make all schools brilliant, and the problem goes away. Children in urban areas should be within walking distance of their primary school. (what was that squeaky pink thing with 4 legs and wings that just flew past?)

Define 'brilliant' though! It's not always directly measurable and Ofsted use random ever-changing criteria.

GoldenBear, when did you move into your home? How old was your ds?
Explain to me what happened as to why your son got allocated a school ( be it amazing) 1.7 miles away, rather than the 2 on your doorstep. Why did you not get allocated either of the 2 outstanding schools that are 900m and 870m away?
If the local school is fab, but is catholic, and you are not, then it is of zero priority.
Waiting lists are only relevant if you are late for the application process. Or, if you don't get the school you want and thus have to go on a waiting list. If you had lived there for more than a year, when you made your son's school application, then waiting lists would not be relevant.

Also, depends where you live. Money isn't everything. Not in all parts of the country. Many of the schools round us are excellent. Some are not go good.
We live in an area that has huge houses with people with a lot of disposable income. Normal houses and normal families, like us. Quite average. And poorer families. And lots of HA families.
And yet ds's school is outstanding. A very strong Head. Families that care, and all spend the designated time, reading every night with their children. It's expected. And all the parents do it. The turnout to Parents evening is almost 100%. For those that can't make it, another appointment is made. Nearly every parent discusses their child, with teacher. No matter how poor or rich you are, parental help with children is expected at our school.
My niece , did Teacher training at our school. And commented on the diversity, but that the parental commitment was remarkable. And that has NOTHING to do with money.

It's perfectly fair.
Schools are about community, you don't live in that community. Are you suggesting that children who live next door to a school should drive for 2.5 miles so that your children can go there?

Your school is rubbish, become a governor, help to improve it.

Ilovecolinfirth - SATS results ARE important though cos no matter what value added a school gets i tcouldn't be judged outstanding & get lower than average results. Also, the more "concerned" parents will pay for tutors in Y6 or GCSE maths & English, helping these "outstanding schools seem even better. As I have said before. some of the best & hardest working teachers are in the "poorest" schools but unfortunately due to gov pressure a lot will burn out due to unrealistic targets & planning.

GoldenBear:
"These schools are expensive to rent near and expensive to buy near- that is a fact!"

Not a fact where we live.

What I don't get about the catchment system is how children who live over a mile from a school can get it, whereas children who live right next to the school cannot, simply because they live on the other side of the catchment boundary. Surely that makes a mockery of the catchment system, of the idea that children should be able to walk to school, and of the idea that school is part if a local community?

^^ no catchment boundary where I live, it's distance.

It should always be distance.

Personally I do not agree with faith schools as they discriminate.
I don't even think siblings should get priority.

Agree with Gracie.
If your local school is rubbish, do something about it.

Or if you're not prepared to, MOVE. If you rent or have a mortgage. MOVE. You have 9 mths of pregnancy and 4 years of child's life, before you make school application. You can't move in 5 years ?
You can't sell your house? Then take less for it. Yes it's a hit. But if it's THAT important to you, to move somewhere, where you want, for a good school. The a loss on your house, will be worth it, IF it's THAT important to you.
It is more than possible.

JUST MOVE.
Millions do it. Why can't you?
But complaining about it, at the last minute?
Didn't you think to address this before? Why are you only complaining now. Why didn't You do something about it?

Where we are the priorities for allocations are

Live in Catchment
Special Needs/Looked After Children
Siblings
Out of Catchment applications.

My ds's school often only get the catchment children in... I've seen years where there has been space for 60 and 66 live in catchment.

The problem is the system that makes you think you have a right to choose your favourite\ the best school. People feel entitled to the best.

We need to go back to the good old fashioned system where your child goes to the nearest school.

Our school had a wobble a few years ago crap head, now gone two of the parents became governors and turned around the problems. got rid of the head

RedHelenB, I did not say that SATS are not important. I only mentioned that value added is an alternative way of measuring. When OFSTED grade a school they do need to know how the school measures up nationally, and they also describe the cohort and their background, ie How many free school meals, the number of EAL students, how many statemented.

I know you have said that many of the hardest-working and best teachers work in some of the 'poorest' schools. I however, have not said the opposite at all. I have worked as a teacher for several years in a comprehensive in one of the most deprived areas of the country. This was indeed a great challenge, however one of the most rewarding jobs that I have ever had.

I cannot understand for a minute how the comment to challenge 'under-achieving' schools can get such an argumentative reply with accusations of me being naive. All teachers should want under-achievement to be challenged, as that is part of our professionalism. We want all children to reach their potential.

And on a finishing note, yes teachers in some of the 'poorest ' schools do get burned-out, however you will find that teachers in any school do. The pressure is on whichever school you teach at.

"It should always be distance."

The problem with "distance" is that it can result in people who live in school places black holes. I know a little girl who lives just a few doors down from us who has been allocated a school 2.5 miles away because her four nearest schools are full. We live in a built up town where industrial areas are being converted into housing, but no schools have been built.

"Personally I do not agree with faith schools as they discriminate."

Faith schools are a hornets' nest.

"I don't even think siblings should get priority."

That would be completely unworkable at primary school level. Prehaps sibling priority should only apply to families who live in catchment or those who have not moved further away.

We need schools to have surplus places to enable people to move house and find places at a new school the area. If schools have to compete for children then standards will rise. Schools will set up after school clubs to attract parents or have to go the extra mile to raise standards

Live in Catchment
Special Needs/Looked After Children
Siblings
Out of Catchment applications.

Personally I think children with SEN and Siblings should always come first.

For the child with SEN if that school for whatever reason is better placed to help the child then they should get priority - actually I thought if a specific school was named on a statement they had to be accepted there?

To not allow siblings in just creates a whole host of issues for parents having to try to juggle numerous schools runs with schools starting and finishing at similar times.

We have several schools in my area that do not offer sibling priority, it has not been a problem for any of the seven years I have lived here.
Only siblings that have moved have been excluded. ( som areas may have an issue but It would only hit a minority of families and someone will always miss out.)

We have two villages which are school black holes. House prices reflect this. If you buy here you must realise that there is not a school in the village...or a doctors.

It would be nice if all the school had surplus places but it's not going to happen. Schools need to be cost effective. Lots of my local schools are old buildings without space.

Sirzy as far as I'm aware the school/county has to have offered the place before its named on the statement.

I disagree on that last point colinlover - being on a school in special measures & behaviour is poor does not compare to teaching in a school where kids are really well behaved & eager to learn.

Are you a teacher?