...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?

ArcheryAnnie, most schools have breakfast and afterschool clubs, many are massively oversubscribed and very expensive. I don't think faith schools have any place in the state sector if this was changed it would make admissions much more equitable and sibling entry would become almost a non issue. All kids should have access to a local, good quality school, if more was invested, (both financially and in terms of population modelling and planning) in providing this then there wouldn't be this desperate scramble for places each year.

I'm finding the experiences people have had with regard to C of E schools to be contrary to mine, I don't know how unusual my experience was.

We put a C of E school as our 1st choice, purely because we liked it the best (and I don't have any problem with C of E schools). In this school with a 2 form entry (60), 35 places were set aside for foundation applicants (i.e those from church-going families) to be allocated in this order: children who attend the church attached to the school, children who attend other C of E churches, children of other Christian denominations.

The remaining 25 places ('open' places) would be allocated as per the usual rules. In actual fact, the reality could be that there would be more open places than foundation, as was the case in the previous year (only 23 foundation places were taken up, meaning that there was majority of non-church children that year).

So anyone could apply and get a place if you lived close enough. A church-going pal, who is also a teacher in a C of E school, said that this should be the usual practice - but it sounds like it isn't?

I don't think we disagree about much, ILovePud, except this one thing. I'm just so fed up of always, always, always being the parent who has to put up with the crumbs from the table for my kid.

Two year age gaps are where bulge classes really play havoc. It's all dreadful but until the government sort it out you are one of thousands in the same boat sadly

"I'm just so fed up of always, always, always being the parent who has to put up with the crumbs from the table for my kid."

But everyone has been in exactly the same position when they were trying to get their eldest into school. Your son would still have been refused entrance to your local state primary even if he'd had a dozen younger siblings. All eldest children, not just onlies, get the "crumbs from the table". So all parents are always, always, always the parent who has to put up with that, because they've all got eldest children.

that's an argument about the inconvenience to the parents, not the welfare of the children.

It isn't inconvenient, it is impossible.

most schools (primary and secondary) have breakfast clubs, so you can drop kids off safely much earlier than school starts.

And most are over subscribed with the children of working parents. There is no space.

You chose to have three children, I chose to have one. Both are valid choices, but your choice is being prioritised above mine.

And your firstborn is being treated in exactly the same way as everyone else's was.

I'm just so fed up of always, always, always being the parent who has to put up with the crumbs from the table for my kid.

Like I said, everybody's firstborn has to put up with those metaphorical crumbs so that is a little over dramatic. Are there any other scenarios other than education where siblings get priority?

heartisaspade i'm very offended by the implication my life is easier than that of a parent of one child because I chose to have a severely disabled child and so have all this wonderful flexibility and 'choice' to not work.

You have no clue what you're spouting about and I truly hope for you that you never have to understand what its like to give up a very well paid career and spend your life counting pennies because no one will look after your lovely but incredibly challenging child.

I can't do multiple drop offs because legally i have to have the children at school on time and the times clash. So whilst i can be flexible the rigidity of the school system just isn't. My life is intrinsically more difficult because I have no childcare options as wrap around care because my child is severely disabled.

ILovePud I know, but that's an argument about the inconvenience to the parents,

But that's a pretty good argument, no? As someone, like you, who is hurt by the sibling rule, it's totally understandable why they have it. having to drop kids off at different schools can easily add significant time to your morning rush, which is a disaster if the parent also has to work. And this is not prioritising adults needs over children's; the sibling gets to go to the school with his sibling. that's usually good for the children.

So anyone could apply and get a place if you lived close enough. A church-going pal, who is also a teacher in a C of E school, said that this should be the usual practice - but it sounds like it isn't?

No, this practice isn't normal throughout (at least, in London, there are many examples to the contrary).

I am surprised at the rationalising people do regarding religious discrimination in schools. If church membership is at all a criteria, and it seems to be for more than half of the places at the school RiverTam mentions, then it's discriminatory, plain and simple, and it would be even if 1 space was reserved for a child of a particular religion. To put this into broader context, imagine any other organization doing this. No employer (except possibly religious ones) or landlord can say "Christians get priority", and that's for good reason.

ArcheryAnnie, I hope that your DS is happy at the school he was allocated, if he's not or the school run is too stressful then the one advantage of being an only child in these circumstances is that the logistics of moving him should be easier than with a sibling group. Have you got his name down on any waiting lists? I do sympathise with your situation, my eldest started at a school which was a 40minutes journey from our house because the schools in our old area were either faith schools with criteria around baptism and church attendance or judged to be inadequate or requiring improvement. It was a nightmare doing the school run before work each day but I was hugely relieved that I could, at least, rely on my younger ones getting in to the same school.

Hi SchoolFury, I know how you feel. It happened to us with dd1. We live 0.2 miles from our closest non-denominational primary and she didn't get a place either. All of the places went to siblings, bar two and they lived pretty much next door to the school. It was incredibly stressful and I really fought it. I wrote to the LEA, the head of children's services, the local councillor and I went to see our MP. Eventually, after many months, the LEA agreed to build an extra classroom. I think in total there were about 8 of us in the village who got in after this. I would definitely recommend kicking up a stink. It worked for us, although it was very stressful at the time. I'll probably have to go through it all again with secondary schools next year! Good luck

I am crying with laughter at this statement:

Faith schools are still prioritising children in their catchment, and even some of them aren't getting places. And in London there are usually loads of schools nearby, more than you can choose as preferences.

Oh yes, we are surrounded by schools! I could absolutely fill my preference form with schools that are within 1.5km of where we live and have schools left over.

Could I get my son into any of them? Fuck no.

Know why? Because of the three schools within 700m of where I live, the two closest (500m) are both CofE schools. After their statutory responsibilities to looked after children, they prioritise: siblings of existing students, children of churchgoers who live nearby, then children of churchgoers who don't live nearby, then children who live nearby.

Many of the children who get in under the sibling criteria are siblings of children who got in under the church criteria - meaning that the school population is further skewed towards those who went to church for at least two years.

The number of children who get in on distance is vanishingly small (nil over the last three years at one of the schools).

The third closest? Well, it's quite a new school, a community school, but its catchment is already tiny because the church schools so skew the catchment profiles. So we have no hope of getting in unless they put a bulge class in.

The other nearby schools? I can, absolutely, pop them on the list. It's an utter waste of time because their catchments, even with bulge classes added, are still minute, even when they are not faith schools (more than half are).

There is the need for 200 more places each year than are actually provided by the borough. This isn't unusual. And local children are routinely disadvantaged by those who come from outside the local area because their parents attended church, because their elder sibling got in because their parents attended church, and because their elder sibling got in because their parents rented across the road from a non-state school for 18 months before moving to a larger and more affordable home.

It's wonderful to have the ability to put so many schools down as preferences. How lucky we are.

I'm a big fan of local priority and larger defined catchments determined by priority, and the abolition of faith-based selection.

Argh. Final sentence is 'larger defined catchments with places determined by lottery'.

I've not read the whole thread but round here siblings are lower down the criteria than children in catchment.

My niece has now got children at two different school, one a 20 minute walk in one direction and one a 20 minute walk in the other. She was in catchment when her ds started school but then moved just outside the catchment due to her marriage breakdown and her dd didn't get in.

She is still number 9 on the waiting list and it's a very popular school so children hardly ever leave.

OP you have my sympathies.

We are less than 0.2 miles from the school gate for our preferred school and they also admitted a bulge class this year. DD1 is due to start school in 2016 so, at two years after the bulge, absolutely prime for sibling clashes. I already know of one girl who got in this year who absolutely would not have got in without the bulge and has a sibling 6 weeks older than my DD1.

The thing is though, there's nothing we can do about it. It's done now (and there was a lot of protest about the bulge class from the existing parent population but the governors decided to do it for the money) so we just have to make sure we've a back up plan.

This just isn't true. The Catholic schools around here won't even give you an application form if you aren't Catholic, and their requirements for being a "proper" Catholic don't just include regular, provable attendance at church (ie a form signed by a priest), but baptism before the age of 6 months (baptise after 6 months and you can whistle for a school place, you heathen) and involvement in the church.

You apply via the LA, not direct to the school. Faith schools are required by law to accept pupils of all faiths and none. They can prioritise children of their own faith but they cannot exclude children who are not of their faith.

I presume you mean they refuse to give non-Catholics their Supplementary Information Form (sometimes known as a Religious Information Form). They cannot refuse to admit a child just because the parents haven't filled in an SIF. I suspect the SIF is about getting information to confirm whether or not an applicant should receive priority on faith grounds. If that is the case it is not relevant to non-Catholic applicants so there is no reason for them to complete the form. The schools may be acting legitimately in refusing to give such applicants the SIF but they would definitely be breaking the law if they refused to accept applications from non-Catholics.

Baptism before 6 months is used by a few RC schools. It is not, however, used universally and even where it is used may contravene Diocesan guidance. If it is indeed contrary to the Diocesan guidance it is a breach of the Admissions Code and can be overturned by referring the matter to the Schools Adjudicator. Giving priority based on involvement in the church beyond basic attendance is also likely to be a breach of the Admissions Code and contrary to Diocesan guidance. A reference to the Schools Adjudicator would almost certainly result in the relevant parts of the school's admission criteria being changed.

The Schools Adjudicator recently ruled against The London Oratory on exactly these grounds. They have amended their admission criteria removing most of the references to involvement in the church. However I suspect that a further reference to the Adjudicator would succeed as I believe their new requirements to qualify as practising Catholic still go beyond Diocesan guidance, particularly on the question of baptism.

CofE schools generally just use regular attendance to give priority. Many also give priority for attendance at other churches. Some also give priority to applicants of other faiths and/or reserve a proportion of places for non-faith applicants.

The sibling issue is particularly distorting in faith schools (where eldest sibling got in under faith criteria, not distance) and where families have moved away - often being replaced in their in-catchment home by another family, which increases overall pressure on places.

heartisaspade, we were notified that she didn't get her place in January of 2009 and we applied in October 2008. I know they have changed the dates now and you apply in January and hear in April. I think the fact that we heard in January bought us more time. We started to kick up a fuss straight away. I did need to calm down initially though as I had worked myself up into a bit of a frenzy about it. Initially I went to see the head teacher and he really did not want to get involved. In fairness, it is nothing to do with them though, but I didn't know what else to do. When I had collected myself, dh and I sat down and drafted a letter. We stated where we lived and how the school was a 3 minute walk from our house and that I didn't drive and that dh worked away, so that it would have been impossible to get to the school which we had been allocated. I'd never heard of it either as it was over two miles away so not even on my radar. I stated that a 5 year old could not possibly walk there as it was over 2.5 miles away and she's need to cross two of the city's busiest roads. The LEA had offered her a taxi, but I said that it would not be right to send a 4 year old in a taxi on her own and I costed up how much it would cost over the year and having to provide car seats. On the bus it would have involved 2 different buses. I talked about not being part of the community where she lived, as she would be at school away from all her friends who lived nearby. I talked about not being part of the community at the school she was offered as she didn't know anyone there. The head of playgroup also wrote us a supporting letter, as did the health visitor. I also mobilised lots of local support and other families wrote letters as they were worried too.

I wrote the letter to the director of children's services and cc'd it to school admissions at the LEA, our local councillor, our MP, the head teacher and the school governors. Our local councillor was very helpful and thought it was a ridiculous situation. He liaised with the director of children's services who was also pretty helpful to be honest. The MP wasn't great and basically told me that it was tough, but he did cc me on all correspondence from the other party's concerned. The director of children's services wrote to me in February and said they were looking into other options with a view to solving the situation, but to lodge an appeal anyway, which I did. Our Mp wrote to me in February to say that they were looking at a meeting with the governors to discuss the financial implications for increasing capacity. We finally received a letter from the LEA in April stating that they were building a new classroom and that dd had got her place.

She started in September and it was a huge relief for us. I would write to everyone you can think of who might be any help. The LEA were clearly aware that it was going to be a big year and I think they knew that the situation was not really acceptable for the local children who had not got a place. I warn you though, that it is very stressful! Hope this is helpful and not too waffly!

They can prioritise children of their own faith...

we have a word for that, and it's not flattering. i am not disputing anything you said, just whether or not it is wrong or desirable to allow faith schools to continue the practice that you say they are engaged in.

about the OP. yeah, it's maddening. As I say, we are in the same boat. I don't know what can be done about it. hopefully, they will have another bulge class the year you/I apply.

Annie I basically agree that faith schools are an anachronism. All I'm arguing about is the idea that forcing them to be non-denominational would solve all our problems.

We'd just have a shortage of premises and funding.

Someone upthread suggested calling their bluff. Not a bad idea but I suspect it would just result in parents using state schools more and sending their children to Sunday schools (or similar) for their spiritual education. Bringing us back to the original problem which is a shortage of schools/classrooms/places.

We did primary admissions in London and got our 5th choice. We were offered the 1st choice the week before (CofE that was allegedly impossible to get into unless you were sleeping with the vicar or similar) but declined it as by then were committed and happy with the 5th choice which turned out to be lovely (though we've since moved away).

Now the dc are in an RC school which has a very diverse population. It's very popular with Muslim families who value educating their children with others who share a faith (even if its not their own).

I'm sure all schools aren't like this and I also agree with the principle that segregating children by faith isn't a good path. The admissions policy is very simple and nothing like some described above. There was mention once of the 'baptism before 6 months' rule being introduced but it was quickly pointed out that it would be against diocese rules.

Other posters are right about your only child - everyone is in that situation when its their eldest child.

Don't write off CoE schools simply because you are not church goers. Some of them have less if a religious ethos than non faith schools.

Don't take the OFSTED report as the be all and end all either. Colleague's DS is at a school which "requires improvement" but is thriving, happy and learning very well there.