...to be so angry and upset by this unfair school admissions policy?

[SchoolFury]

(Have namechanged as this is quite identifiable)

My DD just turned 4 in September, so is due to start Reception next year. Since Jan this year she has been at a preschool (nursery) which is part of a primary school.

It is our nearest school, and the only one for which we are in the 'priority area'. We actually moved to this flat in 2013 in large part because we loved the school so much

It's a non-denominational, community state primary school. We are in a part of London with a lot of faith schools (Jewish, Catholic, CofE) and we are a mixed Jewish/Christian secular family, so faith schools not for us. It's also got an Ofsted '1' (outstanding) in last inspection, though that is less important than the wonderful atmosphere, the sense of community and the fact that my daughter is really thriving in the preschool.

Under normal admissions rules, my daughter would be very likely to get a place there for Reception based on distance - we live less than 0.2 miles from the school. HOWEVER, last year the school decided to take a 'bulge' class, i.e. take 60 pupils in reception instead of 30. They took from a much wider area - up to 0.5 miles from the school - usually the limit is less than 0.3.

This means that siblings of those in the 'bulge' class will get offered places next year ahead of my daughter, and others in her nursery class who live closer, but do not have siblings at the school. I know personally of two families with one child in current reception, with a sibling a year younger, who will therefore get offered places ahead of my daughter even though they live much further away.

I am really distressed by this. The only other nearby school is a failing school (Ofsted rating 3) - not the end of the world, but we are not even in the priority area for it (very near, but wrong side of the road) so we may not even get a place there . And my daughter is so happy in preschool and has lots of good friends and good relationships with the teachers.

If my daughter had been a week older she would have started reception this year and would have got a place for definite. As it is, she almost certainly won't get a place, instead children living much further away will get priority for no reason other than the 'bulge' class taken this year. I have been told there is no chance of them taking another bulge class this year - so what's the point?

AIBU to feel really upset, resentful towards those who have got in this year, and most of all angry with the school for making this decision, which seems really short sighted and unfair on children in subsequent years?

heartisaspade hampshire does it this way round - looked after, sibs in catchment, others in catchment, sibs out of catchment, others out of catchment. It makes so much sense to me. It encourages people with more than one child to stick with their local school which is fabulous in terms of limiting school runs. People still have the option to 'shop around' if they want, but not at the expense of in catchment children.

But it does depend on catchment areas being well matched to numbers of children.

There was a good thread on this a few weeks back, started by someone whose LEA was considering changing I think. IIRC it was in Chat but I can't find it.

But you could still provide a, say, 'Catholic education', within the terms of your trust, without limiting admissions to Catholics.

(Many schools obviously do this anyway; since we first started looking at moving back to Oxon 4-5 years age, a lot of schools have removed the faith criteria for admissions - leant on by the council maybe)

School may yet do a bulge class next year.

Schools around here have been doing annual bulge classes several years on the trot.

Don't give up hope yet!

Because of substantial building in our area, and consequent expansion of one of the schools, the catchment areas are being redrawn. Here siblings are prioritised, but if catchment came higher then you'd find yourself bumped way down despite doing everything right. You shouldn't have to move to stay in catchment: absurd!

I have never heard of Scots not getting into their local schools. How does their (apparently vastly superior) system actually work?

I just had an idea. How about some kind of pupil-premium equivalent, in addition the existing pp not instead, based on what proportion of pupils at the school had it either as their last choice or not on their original choice list at all. That way all the schools that are "last resort, no one wants to go there" get enhanced facilities and resources and become better and hopefully stop being quite so dreadful. I'm sure everyone would benefit from this because you would gradually balance out the dramatic differences between school quality and everyone would be less likely to be unhappy with the school they end up with.

No it would not, Fish, because the best schools are basically judged on the quality of teaching and learning. By juggling children around, and money, there is no guarantee that the quality of teaching or learning will improve in a school. If a school simply does recruit a high quality Head teacher or teachers, it is very difficult to get a school to improve regardless of who goes there or what money they bring with them. Most schools are not judged on facilities, resources or the niceness of their children.

Fish, I think it's a really interesting idea but it wouldn't really deal with the issue of children not being able to get any local school place - except in the distant future.

Milly, I think there's a link between ease of recruiting quality staff and the reputation and facilities the school can offer. Some amazing teachers go into incredibly tough schools - but I suspect 'nicer' schools find it easier to recruit and retain staff.

To be fair on dd she has a similar mind to ds and was much better at that the type of logic that was needed to gey into the school. Its only 10% of intake going to aptitude for technology which is 18 students. It could be said that as a sibling she opened up an aptitude place for someone else.
The siblings of ds and his 2 friends totaled 2 two years later, 1 the next year and 1 the year after that. The boy who got in year above we knew has a sibling, but the two girls that passed the year after dc had no siblings.
Most of the intake is local and i suspect siblings of aptitude are only a small percentage of the annual intake

that wants to allow all state schools to be allowed to give priority to pupil premium pupils.

Interesting tiggy. Allow or force? Surely it would have to be the latter?

Why would it be compulsion, what? Some schools might prefer the increased funding and more diverse school population rather that prioritising those who can afford to live next door, for instance.

I've done a bit of a straw poll of faith school admissions locally today (work avoidance).

Generally, the RC ask for 'baptised Catholics'. Nothing else, like flower arrangers, church attendance, shag the vicar - or any of the rigorous requirements described by some above. Definitely easy to blag your way in if you're so inclined.

CofE tend to be more specific and often include a 'regular attendance (at least twice a month for the last two years) at mass, by signing the register'. BUT they do have a proportion of places for none faith children though. I've not seen any of the RC schools do this.

No particular point to make, and not necessarily representative.

Well I was thinking about state, faith schools when I wrote that jassy and I don't think they would.

But yes you might be right.

I can see that faith schools might not go for it - but those with partly non-faith intakes might do it instead of distance as part of the ethos of service (so long as there were places left after siblings...)