To feel extremely worried and rather ticked off about this?......

[EmiliaJ]

Basically my daughter who is age 10 (11 in September) is due to go into year 6 at an outstanding catholic school. She previously attended a non Catholic primary due to us losing our appeal, but a place became available when she was two weeks into starting year 3, and as we had always wanted her at this school, which just so happens to be the feeder school to the only outstanding Catholic secondary in our borough we decided to move her there. She's since never looked back, has an amazing friendship group, has come on in her education more than we could have ever expected etc and we are all really happy.

Like I said we hoped she will go onto the feeder secondary school and up until now she has been considered top priority along with most of her other classmates ie baptised Catholic who lives within one of the named parishes AND has attended a Catholic primary school. But we have now been informed (2 weeks ago!) that the secondary school has changed it's criteria frok 2016 onwards and they are no longer stipulating that for a child to be high up the criteria they must have attended Catholic primary. So basically now as long as a child is baptiseD Catholic and they live within one of the six parishes (ours is 3rd closest to the school) then they will likely gain a place. I can't help but worry now as this means my dd will be fighting for a place whereas before they changed the criteria she would have got in no problem. So Aibu to br worried and am I overreacting? I mean realistically how many children who have not attended Catholic primary will actually want to go to a Catholic secondary?......

It's perfectly fair for as many children as possible to have the same shot at getting into an excellent school.

An excellent (inc. atheist and Muslim taxpayer funded!!) state education should not be dependent on the parents' attendance at church.

It might seem unfair to you, but objectively speaking it's more than reasonable for them to have widened the admissions criteria.

If you hadn't got her in to the primary then you'd probably be ecstatic with the change. It's entirely natural to be annoyed when something changes which could affect you negatively. But I think yabu as the change will make it fairer on people who were pretty much in your position till a few years ago. (But I am surprised that there isn't anything about attending one of the churches as well as being baptised).

But a lot of people think it's unfair that only people of a certain religion get into a particular school. Horses for courses.

Was the primary school a named feeder school? Because if not, and the oversubscription criteria merely said something like "children who have attended a catholic primary school" then the change is likely to follow from rulings made by the Schools Adjudicator which have criticised catholic secondary schools for using such criterial.

criteria, not criterial

But it's not dependant on the parent's church attendance, and it never has been. Basically prior to these changes it gave first preference to children who had attended Catholic primary school and who, understandably wanted to carry on with their Catholic education, what exactly is wrong with that? I mean yes, there may be parents who applied for Catholic primary school and who, like me initially missed out, but there are now going to be lots of parents who apply for the secondary who simply had their kids baptised on a whim, due to, oh I don't know, family pressures and they will now opt for the secondary just because it's a great school and not because they and their children genuinely are of the faith, now that to me is what is truly unfair.

It's a state school, so I'm pleased to hear that church attendance is irrelevant. Sorry OP but state faith schools are ridiculous. This new system that you're in is fairer and makes more sense.

Oh for goodness sake, everyone knows that I meant to type criteria. I'm curently using an i phone that is on loan to me whilst my Samsung is being repaired, and I haven't yet adjusted to the tiny and closely spaced letters, sorry about that!

Are there no other Catholic secondaries in the area?

They're ridiculous really?......wow!

Yes, utterly ridiculous.

There is one other Catholic secondary but it's on the other side of town and this one in particular doesn't have the best reputation. Plus it would mean that she would move up with none of her friends from primary and I can't do that to her.

Calm down, as far as I can see in both of those "grammar police" comments the poster was referring to their own previous post, not yours!

Yes Press totally agree.

Why should tax payers' money fund discriminatory faith schools?

Why should any child take priority over shutter just because their parents have taken them through some superstitious nonsense.

All faith schools should be funded privately by the relevant religion.

Why exactly? Is it simply because faith schools tend to have better morals, sense of community and almost always produce better results and ofsted reports than your typical community school?......

Emiliaj, I was correcting myself, not you.

You didn't answer my question. If the criteria previously said "children who attended a catholic primary school" then the Schools Adjudicator's view is that this is not compliant with the law and statutory guidance on school admissions. Named feeders are ok but 'catholic primary school' ain't.

It's wrong precisely because of how your situation would have been if you didn't get lucky in managing to get in to the primary. I get it, you're pissed off, perhaps understandably. Doesn't mean what they're doing is wrong though. What you're arguing is that attending the primary is some sort of test of commitment, but surely attending church shows that much better. As they don't use that as a criteria it seems that they are not bothered about commitment, only whether they're baptised and in the right area.

I think you're cross about the wrong thing. Most CofE schools I know prioritise those who attend church.

Judge Catholic .... Oh dear OP

Better morals?? CATHOLICS??!!

I'd happily pay for my dd to attend Catholic school, we aren't well off but I'd find the money somehow. And as for my dd's school they do not discriminate, I mean yes they obviously have Catholic children higher up the criteria list but they accept children of other and non faith. There must be at least 14 kids in my dd's class of 29 who are either non religious or are C of E etc, so don't give me that discriminatory garbage!

Cross posted....not doing yourself any favours here OP.

Oh dear.

Pulls up a chair....

I really don't want religious schools done away with, but any religious criteria should be banned.
If baptism alone would have done it I'd have gone through with it for a good state secondary, as would dd.

"They have Catholic children higher up the criteria" - I suggest you research the definition of 'discrimination', OP.

Sending my children to the local non faith comp guarantees their sense of community - and their strong moral compass due to the diversity they experience.
Pretending catholic schools produce elite human beings with permanent halos over their heads is fucking ridiculous.
Unless you are paying for your dd education you are in the post code lottery with everyone else when it comes to place allocation for secondary schools